Rowe v. Duetche Bank National Trust Co.

49 So. 3d 1285, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 20232, 2010 WL 5306529
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 28, 2010·No. No. 1D10-5660·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Contending that the trial court failed to rule on her properly served motion for disqualification within 30 days as required by Florida Rule of Judicial Administration 2.330(j), petitioner seeks mandamus relief [1286]*1286in the form of an order compelling the lower tribunal clerk to reassign her case. Although the parties have stipulated to granting the relief sought, petitioner fails to show that, as contemplated by the rule, she has sought an order from the trial court directing the clerk to reassign the case. Making such a demand is required in order to establish an entitlement to this court’s intervention by writ of mandamus. See KKP Holdings, LLC v. Russell, 1 So.3d 1287 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009); see also Harrison v. Johnson, 934 So.2d 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (denying mandamus relief where petitioner had failed to bring motion for reassignment before the trial court in order to obtain a ruling). Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED as premature.

PADOVANO, ROBERTS, and MARSTILLER, JJ., concur.

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

Rowe v. Duetche Bank National Trust Co., 49 So. 3d 1285, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 20232, 2010 WL 5306529 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

49 So. 3d 1285 (Rowe v. Duetche Bank National Trust Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McCray v. State
151 So. 3d 449 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)