Princess Cruises, Inc. v. Edwards

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Princess Cruises, Inc. v. Edwards

611 So. 2d 598, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 41, 1993 WL 2959

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 6, 1993

DocketNo. 92-02868

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 611 So. 2d 598 (Princess Cruises, Inc. v. Edwards) 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

Princess Cruises, Inc. v. Edwards, 611 So. 2d 598, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 41, 1993 WL 2959 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of an order compelling discovery is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, because it was not filed within thirty days of rendition of the order sought to be reviewed. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100(c). The petition herein was filed after the court denied the petitioner’s motion for rehearing addressed to the order on review. There is no provision in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure authorizing a motion for rehearing addressed to an interlocutory or nonfinal order. The petitioner’s filing of a motion for rehearing, even though the trial court entertained it, did not toll the time for filing the petition. See Potucek v. Smeja, 419 So.2d 1192 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Therefore, an appeal from the denial of the rehearing motion is not authorized and the purported motion for rehearing did not toll the time to seek certiorari review. See Bensonhurst Drywall, Inc. v. Ledesma, 583 So.2d 1094 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Ramos v. State, 456 So.2d 1297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

Petition for writ of certiorari dismissed.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and HALL and BLUE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This petition for writ of certiorari seeking review of an order compelling discovery is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction, because it was not filed within thirty days of rendition of the order sought to be reviewed. Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.100(c). The petition herein was filed after the court denied the petitioner’s motion for rehearing addressed to the order on review. There is no provision in the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure authorizing a motion for rehearing addressed to an interlocutory or nonfinal order. The petitioner’s filing of a motion for rehearing, even though the trial court entertained it, did not toll the time for filing the petition. See Potucek v. Smeja, 419 So.2d 1192 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). Therefore, an appeal from the denial of the rehearing motion is not authorized and the purported motion for rehearing did not toll the time to seek certiorari review. See Bensonhurst Drywall, Inc. v. Ledesma, 583 So.2d 1094 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991); Ramos v. State, 456 So.2d 1297 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

Petition for writ of certiorari dismissed.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and HALL and BLUE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

611 So. 2d 598, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 41, 1993 WL 2959, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/princess-cruises-inc-v-edwards-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack