Hoffman v. Dickerson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hoffman v. Dickerson

692 So. 2d 316, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4849, 1997 WL 216594

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 2, 1997

DocketNo. 97-186

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 692 So. 2d 316 (Hoffman v. Dickerson) 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

Hoffman v. Dickerson, 692 So. 2d 316, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 4849, 1997 WL 216594 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari before this court seeks review of an order denying a motion to consolidate two eases below.

The petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed because this court does not have jurisdiction. The petition was filed more than thirty days after the entry of the order denying consolidation. A motion for rehearing directed to an interlocutory order is unauthorized and does not toll the time for the filing of a petition for certiorari. Shelnutt v. Citrus County, 660 So.2d 393 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995); Coldwell Banker Commercial v. Wightman, 649 So.2d 346 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995).

PETITION DISMISSED.

GRIFFIN, THOMPSON and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

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