O'Brien v. Exposito

824 So. 2d 954, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11408, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1787
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 2, 2002·No. No. 3D02-2029·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

William O’Brien petitions this Court for writ of certiorari seeking to quash a trial court order that deferred ruling on the issue of whether O’Brien was entitled to qualified immunity. We grant the petition pursuant to rule 9.030(b)(2)(A), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure (2001). Because qualified immunity protects a public official from having to defend a suit, see Tucker v. Resha, 648 So.2d 1187, 1189 (Fla.1994), O’Brien will effectively lose his entitlement to qualified immunity if the case proceeds to trial, thereby causing irreparable injury to O’Brien. By deferring ruling, the trial court departed from the essential requirements of the law. The trial court is therefore required to either grant or deny O’Brien’s motion for summary judgment. O’Brien will then be entitled to appeal a denial of his claim for qualified immunity under rule 9.130(a)(3)(C)(vii), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure (2001).

We therefore grant the petition and remand with directions that the trial court enter an order determining O’Brien’s entitlement to qualified immunity.

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

O'Brien v. Exposito, 824 So. 2d 954, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 11408, 27 Fla. L. Weekly Fed. D 1787 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

824 So. 2d 954 (O'Brien v. Exposito) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A. v. LISA S. DULBERG DE MORALES
District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2020
Florida Fish & Wildlife Conservation Commission v. Jeffrey
178 So. 3d 460 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2015)
Fuller v. Truncale
50 So. 3d 25 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)