Prater v. Crosby

917 So. 2d 1037, 2006 WL 42222
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 10, 2006·No. 1D05-0504·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

917 So.2d 1037 (2006)

Randall T. PRATER, Appellant,
v.
James V. CROSBY, Appellee.

No. 1D05-0504.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 10, 2006.

Ronald T. Prater, pro se, appellant.

Charlie Crist, Attorney General, and Sean F. Callaghan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellee's motion to relinquish jurisdiction is treated as a concession of error. The order denying appellant's "Complaint for Declaratory Relief" is reversed, and this cause is remanded for further proceedings in which petitioner is provided an opportunity to reply to the response filed below. The circuit court erred in denying the complaint prior to expiration of the time afforded appellant to reply to the response. See Salow v. State, 766 So.2d 1222 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)(stating that the trial court should read and consider a court-authorized reply before denying a petition).

ERVIN, BENTON and LEWIS, JJ., concur.

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

Prater v. Crosby, 917 So. 2d 1037, 2006 WL 42222 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

917 So. 2d 1037 (Prater v. Crosby) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Barber v. State
917 So. 2d 1037 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2006)