Sawyer v. Goldberg

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sawyer v. Goldberg

865 So. 2d 583, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 22, 2004 WL 32397

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 7, 2004

DocketNo. 2D03-1440

StatusPublished

This text of 865 So. 2d 583 (Sawyer v. Goldberg) 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

Sawyer v. Goldberg, 865 So. 2d 583, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 22, 2004 WL 32397 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

DAVIS, Judge.

Jack Carlyle Sawyer, a state prisoner, challenges the interlocutory circuit court order denying his insolvency status in his civil suit against Scot Goldberg. Because the court’s order denying insolvency does not fall into one of the categories of ap-pealable nonfinal orders enumerated in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C), we elect to treat this case as a petition for writ of certiorari under rule 9.030(b)(2)(A).

The trial court entered an order directing the clerk of court not to issue a certificate of indigency to Sawyer in the underlying cause of action, finding that he was not entitled to such benefits under section 57.081, Florida Statutes (2002). Although this particular indigency statute specifically excludes state prisoners, section 57.085 does contain the procedure by which a prisoner may proceed in court without charge.

Based on the record before us, which does not include Sawyer’s affidavit of indi-gency, we cannot determine under which statute Sawyer filed that affidavit. Since the trial court’s order is a proper reading of section 57.081, and since Sawyer has not furnished this court with an adequate record, we cannot conclude that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by applying the incorrect statute. We therefore deny Sawyer’s petition for writ of certiorari; however, we do so without prejudice to any right Sawyer may have to file with the trial court an affidavit of indigency under the proper statute.

Denied.

ALTENBERND, C.J., and SILBERMAN, J., Concur.

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

DAVIS, Judge.

Jack Carlyle Sawyer, a state prisoner, challenges the interlocutory circuit court order denying his insolvency status in his civil suit against Scot Goldberg. Because the court’s order denying insolvency does not fall into one of the categories of ap-pealable nonfinal orders enumerated in Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130(a)(3)(C), we elect to treat this case as a petition for writ of certiorari under rule 9.030(b)(2)(A).

The trial court entered an order directing the clerk of court not to issue a certificate of indigency to Sawyer in the underlying cause of action, finding that he was not entitled to such benefits under section 57.081, Florida Statutes (2002). Although this particular indigency statute specifically excludes state prisoners, section 57.085 does contain the procedure by which a prisoner may proceed in court without charge.

Based on the record before us, which does not include Sawyer’s affidavit of indi-gency, we cannot determine under which statute Sawyer filed that affidavit. Since the trial court’s order is a proper reading of section 57.081, and since Sawyer has not furnished this court with an adequate record, we cannot conclude that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by applying the incorrect statute. We therefore deny Sawyer’s petition for writ of certiorari; however, we do so without prejudice to any right Sawyer may have to file with the trial court an affidavit of indigency under the proper statute.

Denied.

ALTENBERND, C.J., and SILBERMAN, J., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

865 So. 2d 583, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 22, 2004 WL 32397, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sawyer-v-goldberg-fladistctapp-2004.