Duval County Hospital Authority v. Williams ex rel. Williams

219 So. 2d 732, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6206
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMarch 11, 1969
DocketNo. K-454
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 219 So. 2d 732 (Duval County Hospital Authority v. Williams ex rel. Williams) 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
Duval County Hospital Authority v. Williams ex rel. Williams, 219 So. 2d 732, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6206 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioners seek review by certiorari of an order rendered by the trial court granting plaintiff’s (respondent’s) motion to strike paragraphs 8, 9 and 10 of petitioners-defendants amended answer. It appears that the petitioners here, in a prior suit between the same parties, requested the trial court to limit the then plaintiff’s cause of action to things transpiring within certain specified dates, which dates excluded the happenings which form the basis of this suit. Now these petitioners are asking the trial court to hold that the plaintiff split this cause of action and also that the things complained of were res adjudicata.

It appears that the conduct of the petitioners in the first suit prevented the issues from becoming res adjudicata by having the trial court prevent the plaintiff therein from prosecuting such issues.

[733]*733This cause has been orally argued before the court and the briefs and record have been read and given full consideration. Petitioners have failed to demonstrate that the trial court acted without and in excess of its jurisdiction or that the order does not conform to the essential requirements of law and may cause material injury throughout subsequent proceedings for which there is no full, adequate, and complete remedy by appeal after final judgment available to petitioners. Certiorari is accordingly denied. Boucher v. Pure Oil Company, 101 So.2d 408 (Fla.App.1957); Pullman Company v. Fleishel, 101 So.2d 188 (Fla.App.1958); Seaboard Air Line Railroad Company v. Timmons, 61 So.2d 426 (Fla.1952).

RAWLS, Acting C. J., and JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Surf Colony Dock Ass'n v. Vanderbilt Towers Unit 1 of Naples Ass'n
708 So. 2d 304 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Warner Cable Communications, Inc. v. City of Niceville
581 So. 2d 1352 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Wooten v. Rhodus
470 So. 2d 844 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
219 So. 2d 732, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 6206, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/duval-county-hospital-authority-v-williams-ex-rel-williams-fladistctapp-1969.