Narrative Opinion Summary
A show cause order was issued regarding a petition for review by defendants in a personal injury case. After reviewing the petition, responses, and replies, the court determined that the trial court's interlocutory order, which upheld respondents' objection to the defendants' request for examination under Rule 1.360 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, did not deviate from essential legal requirements and did not cause a significant injury that would warrant an appellate remedy. The court cited prior case law, including Pregony v. Custer and Martin-Johnson v. Savage, to support this conclusion. Therefore, based on jurisdictional grounds, the petition for certiorari was denied, with Judges JOANOS, WIGGINTON, and ALLEN concurring.
Legal Issues Addressed
Interlocutory Orders and Appellate Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court determined that the trial court's interlocutory order did not warrant an appellate remedy because it did not deviate from essential legal requirements or cause a significant injury.
Reasoning: The court determined that the trial court's interlocutory order, which upheld respondents' objection to the defendants' request for examination under Rule 1.360 of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, did not deviate from essential legal requirements and did not cause a significant injury that would warrant an appellate remedy.
Jurisdictional Grounds for Certiorari Denialsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The petition for certiorari was denied based on jurisdictional grounds as the interlocutory order did not meet the threshold for appellate intervention.
Reasoning: Therefore, based on jurisdictional grounds, the petition for certiorari was denied, with Judges JOANOS, WIGGINTON, and ALLEN concurring.
Reference to Precedent in Certiorari Decisionssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court cited prior case law, including Pregony v. Custer and Martin-Johnson v. Savage, to support its decision to deny the petition for certiorari.
Reasoning: The court cited prior case law, including Pregony v. Custer and Martin-Johnson v. Savage, to support this conclusion.