Gosman v. Moore

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gosman v. Moore

745 So. 2d 416, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 14314, 1999 WL 979455

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 29, 1999

DocketNo. 98-1321

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 745 So. 2d 416 (Gosman v. Moore) 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

Gosman v. Moore, 745 So. 2d 416, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 14314, 1999 WL 979455 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of an order dismissing his petition for a writ of mandamus challenging prison disciplinary proceedings because he failed to comply with a provision of a case management order requiring that he file a certificate signed by an appropriate bank officer reflecting the balance of all bank accounts on the date the petition was filed, and the total amount of deposits for the preceding six months. Following entry of the order, appellant timely served and filed a motion requesting rehearing. While that motion was pending, appellant also filed a certificate which substantially complied with the requirement of the case management order. Notwithstanding the filing of the certificate, the trial court denied appellant’s motion for rehearing. This was error. We reverse the order dismissing appellant’s petition, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

JOANOS, WEBSTER and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of an order dismissing his petition for a writ of mandamus challenging prison disciplinary proceedings because he failed to comply with a provision of a case management order requiring that he file a certificate signed by an appropriate bank officer reflecting the balance of all bank accounts on the date the petition was filed, and the total amount of deposits for the preceding six months. Following entry of the order, appellant timely served and filed a motion requesting rehearing. While that motion was pending, appellant also filed a certificate which substantially complied with the requirement of the case management order. Notwithstanding the filing of the certificate, the trial court denied appellant’s motion for rehearing. This was error. We reverse the order dismissing appellant’s petition, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

REVERSED and REMANDED, with directions.

JOANOS, WEBSTER and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

745 So. 2d 416, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 14314, 1999 WL 979455, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gosman-v-moore-fladistctapp-1999.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack