Siegers Seed Co. v. Williams Farm Partnership

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Siegers Seed Co. v. Williams Farm Partnership

17 So. 3d 848, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 13197, 2009 WL 2886828

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 31, 2009

DocketNo. 1D08-3920

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 17 So. 3d 848 (Siegers Seed Co. v. Williams Farm Partnership) 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

Siegers Seed Co. v. Williams Farm Partnership, 17 So. 3d 848, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 13197, 2009 WL 2886828 (Fla. Ct. App. 2009).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, Siegers Seed Company, seeks a writ of certiorari to overturn a letter of the Agriculture Commissioner which petitioner characterizes as final agency action. The letter indicates the Commissioner’s concurrence with the report and recommendation of the State of Florida Department of Agriculture, Florida Seed Investigation and Conciliation Council (“Council”). See §§ 578.26 & 578.27, Fla. Stat. Seigers asserts that the Council’s recommendation departs from the essential requirements of law because it exceeds the Council’s statutory authority by recommending “monetary damages” rather than limiting its recommendation to “cost damages” as provided by sections 578.27(2) and (4), Florida Statutes. Because the letter does not serve as a basis for our certiorari jurisdiction, we dismiss the petition.

The parties do not dispute that neither the Commissioner’s letter nor the Council’s recommendation was filed with the agency clerk. An agency does not render a final order until it is filed with the agency clerk. See Hill v. Div. of Ret., 687 So.2d 1376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Gallo v. Florida Comm’n on Human Relations, 867 So.2d 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); See also Fla. R.App. P. 9.020(h) (“An order is rendered when a signed, written order is filed with the clerk of the lower tribunal.”). An order must be rendered in order to invoke appellate jurisdiction, United Water Fla., Inc. v. Florida Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 728 So.2d 1250 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), and to invoke this court’s original jurisdiction. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.100(c) (providing that a petition for certiorari must be filed within 30 days of rendition of the order to be reviewed).

Accordingly, the petition for writ of cer-tiorari is DISMISSED.

HAWKES, C.J., ALLEN, and CLARK, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, Siegers Seed Company, seeks a writ of certiorari to overturn a letter of the Agriculture Commissioner which petitioner characterizes as final agency action. The letter indicates the Commissioner’s concurrence with the report and recommendation of the State of Florida Department of Agriculture, Florida Seed Investigation and Conciliation Council (“Council”). See §§ 578.26 & 578.27, Fla. Stat. Seigers asserts that the Council’s recommendation departs from the essential requirements of law because it exceeds the Council’s statutory authority by recommending “monetary damages” rather than limiting its recommendation to “cost damages” as provided by sections 578.27(2) and (4), Florida Statutes. Because the letter does not serve as a basis for our certiorari jurisdiction, we dismiss the petition.

The parties do not dispute that neither the Commissioner’s letter nor the Council’s recommendation was filed with the agency clerk. An agency does not render a final order until it is filed with the agency clerk. See Hill v. Div. of Ret., 687 So.2d 1376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Gallo v. Florida Comm’n on Human Relations, 867 So.2d 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); See also Fla. R.App. P. 9.020(h) (“An order is rendered when a signed, written order is filed with the clerk of the lower tribunal.”). An order must be rendered in order to invoke appellate jurisdiction, United Water Fla., Inc. v. Florida Pub. Serv. Comm’n, 728 So.2d 1250 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999), and to invoke this court’s original jurisdiction. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.100(c) (providing that a petition for certiorari must be filed within 30 days of rendition of the order to be reviewed).

Accordingly, the petition for writ of cer-tiorari is DISMISSED.

HAWKES, C.J., ALLEN, and CLARK, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

17 So. 3d 848, 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 13197, 2009 WL 2886828, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/siegers-seed-co-v-williams-farm-partnership-fladistctapp-2009.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack