De Cosmo v. Forst
135 So. 3d 1163, 2014 WL 1612694, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 5740
This text of 135 So. 3d 1163 (De Cosmo v. Forst) 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
De Cosmo v. Forst, 135 So. 3d 1163, 2014 WL 1612694, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 5740 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).
Opinion
Petitioner has not demonstrated that the trial court has failed to timely consider and rule upon any pending pleading or motion after having that matter called up for hearing and disposition. Petitioner has therefore failed to demonstrate an entitlement to mandamus relief. See Smartt v. First Union Nat Bank, 771 So.2d 1232 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000). We DENY the petition accordingly.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Smartt v. First Union National Bank
771 So. 2d 1232 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
135 So. 3d 1163, 2014 WL 1612694, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 5740, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-cosmo-v-forst-fladistctapp-2014.