Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Smith v. McNeil

Smith v. McNeil

44 So. 3d 641, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 13318, 2010 WL 3465160
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 7, 2010
Docket1D09-6366
StatusPublished

This text of 44 So. 3d 641 (Smith v. McNeil) 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
Smith v. McNeil, 44 So. 3d 641, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 13318, 2010 WL 3465160 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We conclude that the circuit court departed from the essential requirements of law by denying the petition for writ of mandamus without affording petitioner the opportunity to reply to the response. See Bard v. Wolson, 687 So.2d 254 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Salow v. State, 766 So.2d 1222 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000); Huffman v. Fla. Dep’t of Corr., 981 So.2d 482 (Fla. 1st DCA 2008). Accordingly, the circuit court’s order denying the petition for writ of mandamus is quashed, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court for further proceedings.

PETITION GRANTED.

THOMAS, BENTON, and ROWE, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Huffman v. Florida Department of Corrections
981 So. 2d 482 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)
Salow v. State
766 So. 2d 1222 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2000)
Bard v. Wolson
687 So. 2d 254 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
44 So. 3d 641, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 13318, 2010 WL 3465160, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/smith-v-mcneil-fladistctapp-2010.