JA & M Developing Corp. v. Perez

114 So. 3d 410, 2013 WL 2321171, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8483
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedMay 29, 2013
DocketNo. 3D13-552
StatusPublished

This text of 114 So. 3d 410 (JA & M Developing Corp. v. Perez) 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
JA & M Developing Corp. v. Perez, 114 So. 3d 410, 2013 WL 2321171, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8483 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, JA & M Developing Corporation, files a petition for writ of certiorari which seeks to quash two trial court orders: (1) a January 29, 2013 order, which denied JA & M’s motion to compel a neurological independent medical examination (“IME”); and (2) a February 22, 2013 order, which denied JA & M’s motion in limine with respect to opinions on neurological issues to be offered by an expert hired by respondent, Luis Orlando Perez. Because, as respondent concedes, our recent opinion in Gomez v. Rendon, — So.3d - (Fla. 3d DCA 2013), requires an IME under the circumstances presented, we grant the petition with respect to the January 29, 2013 order, quash the order, and remand for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. With respect to the February 22, 2013 order, however, [411]*411we deny the petition, finding that the stringent standard for certiorari review has not been satisfied with respect to this order. Allstate Ins. Co. v. Langston, 655 So.2d 91, 94 (Fla.1995).

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

Related

Allstate Ins. Co. v. Langston
655 So. 2d 91 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1995)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
114 So. 3d 410, 2013 WL 2321171, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8483, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ja-m-developing-corp-v-perez-fladistctapp-2013.