Curry v. Singletary

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Curry v. Singletary

679 So. 2d 21, 1996 WL 441598

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 7, 1996·No. No. 95-3757·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We elect to treat appellee’s motion to relinquish jurisdiction as a confession of error. Appellee concedes that appellant’s motion to amend his petition for writ of mandamus should have been granted by the lower court. We therefore REVERSE the order dismissing the petition for writ of mandamus and REMAND for further proceedings following the filing of an amended petition and appel-lee’s filing of a responsive pleading thereto.

WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We elect to treat appellee’s motion to relinquish jurisdiction as a confession of error. Appellee concedes that appellant’s motion to amend his petition for writ of mandamus should have been granted by the lower court. We therefore REVERSE the order dismissing the petition for writ of mandamus and REMAND for further proceedings following the filing of an amended petition and appel-lee’s filing of a responsive pleading thereto.

WEBSTER and MICKLE, JJ., and SHIVERS, Senior Judge, concur.

Curry v. Singletary, 679 So. 2d 21, 1996 WL 441598 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

679 So. 2d 21 (Curry v. Singletary) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.