Adorno & Yoss, LLP v. Soltero

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Adorno & Yoss, LLP v. Soltero

133 So. 3d 1124, 2014 WL 543281, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1857

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 12, 2014

DocketNo. 3D13-2900

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 133 So. 3d 1124 (Adorno & Yoss, LLP v. Soltero) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Adorno & Yoss, LLP v. Soltero, 133 So. 3d 1124, 2014 WL 543281, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1857 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

Pincite

Opinion

LAGOA, J.

Petitioners, Adorno & Yoss, LLP, 1/k/a Yoss, LLP, n/k/a Liquidating Law Firm, LLP, Steven D. Ginsburg a/k/a Steven David Ginsburg and Neil Preston Linden, petition this Court for a writ of certiorari, seeking to quash the trial court’s order denying their motion for determination of plaintiffs burden of proof in a legal malpractice case. Because the petitioners have failed to meet the threshold requirement of showing that the trial court’s order creates irreparable harm, we dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari for lack of jurisdiction. See Bd. of Trs. of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund v. Am. Educ. Enters., LLC, 99 So.3d 450, 454-55 (Fla.2012) (stating that irreparable harm is a condition precedent to invoking a district court’s certiorari jurisdiction); Jaye v. Royal Saxon, Inc., 720 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla.1998) (“[I]t is settled law that, as a condition precedent to invoking a district court’s certiorari jurisdiction, the petitioning party must establish that it has suffered an irreparable harm that cannot be remedied on direct appeal.”); Echevarria, McCalla, Raymer, Barrett & Frappier v. Cole, 896 So.2d 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

Accordingly, the petition for writ of cer-tiorari is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

LAGOA, J.

Petitioners, Adorno & Yoss, LLP, 1/k/a Yoss, LLP, n/k/a Liquidating Law Firm, LLP, Steven D. Ginsburg a/k/a Steven David Ginsburg and Neil Preston Linden, petition this Court for a writ of certiorari, seeking to quash the trial court’s order denying their motion for determination of plaintiffs burden of proof in a legal malpractice case. Because the petitioners have failed to meet the threshold requirement of showing that the trial court’s order creates irreparable harm, we dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari for lack of jurisdiction. See Bd. of Trs. of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund v. Am. Educ. Enters., LLC, 99 So.3d 450, 454-55 (Fla.2012) (stating that irreparable harm is a condition precedent to invoking a district court’s certiorari jurisdiction); Jaye v. Royal Saxon, Inc., 720 So.2d 214, 215 (Fla.1998) (“[I]t is settled law that, as a condition precedent to invoking a district court’s certiorari jurisdiction, the petitioning party must establish that it has suffered an irreparable harm that cannot be remedied on direct appeal.”); Echevarria, McCalla, Raymer, Barrett & Frappier v. Cole, 896 So.2d 779 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004).

Accordingly, the petition for writ of cer-tiorari is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 So. 3d 1124, 2014 WL 543281, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 1857, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/adorno-yoss-llp-v-soltero-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack