Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services v. Patchen

25 So. 3d 1283, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 526, 2010 WL 298042
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 27, 2010·No. 3D09-330·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

SHEPHERD, J.

In this case, the Florida Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services seeks review of a non-final order granting a stay of an individually filed inverse condemnation action, for the destruction of citrus canker exposed trees, pending a decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in a related class action on which it appears the briefing recently has been completed. The Department characterizes the order under review as “in the nature of an injunction” and therefore seeks to invoke the jurisdiction of this Court under section 9.130(a)(3)(B) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. We treat the appeal as a petition for certiorari but deny the relief sought. 1

1

. Although there has been some sentiment expressed by this Court that orders granting or denying a stay of proceedings before the entry of final judgment should be treated as an appeal from a non-final order granting or denying an injunction, see Klein v. Royale Group, Ltd., 524 So.2d 1061, 1063 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), the law of this district appears to remain that certiorari is the appropriate procedure by which to seek review of such orders. See Pilevsky v. Morgans Hotel Group Mgmt., LLC, 961 So.2d 1032, 1033 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007); Transcontinental Realty Corp. v. Ezell, 365 So.2d 404, 404 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

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

Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services v. Patchen, 25 So. 3d 1283, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 526, 2010 WL 298042 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

25 So. 3d 1283 (Department of Agriculture & Consumer Services v. Patchen) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Stok & Associates, P.A. v. Citibank, N.A.
58 So. 3d 366 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)