Patrice Kerr v. Second Judicial Circuit Court

Opinion

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-0297

_____________________________

PATRICE KERR,

Petitioner,

v.

SECOND JUDICIAL CIRCUIT COURT,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Mandamus–Original Jurisdiction.

February 20, 2018

PER CURIAM.

Patrice Kerr filed a tort suit against several public officials and other defendants, seeking monetary and injunctive relief. Claiming the trial court has not timely ruled on his pending motions, Kerr seeks a writ of mandamus. But in a civil case like this one, “it is the litigant’s obligation to take such actions as are necessary to prosecute the case to final disposition, and, in the course of that, to file such motions as may be necessary and bring those motions to the trial court’s attention for a ruling.” Thomas v. State, Dep’t of Revenue, 74 So. 3d 145 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011). Because Kerr has made no showing that he has taken such actions, his petition is DENIED.

JAY, WINSOR, and M.K. THOMAS, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.

_____________________________

Patrice Kerr, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.