Spirit Lake Properties, Inc. v. Watson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Spirit Lake Properties, Inc. v. Watson

827 So. 2d 1043, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14533, 2002 WL 31250309

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 9, 2002

DocketNo. 2D02-1194

StatusPublished

This text of 827 So. 2d 1043 (Spirit Lake Properties, Inc. v. Watson) 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

Spirit Lake Properties, Inc. v. Watson, 827 So. 2d 1043, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14533, 2002 WL 31250309 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Pincite

Opinion

WHATLEY, Judge.

Spirit Lake Properties, Inc., and Tripp Investments, Inc., filed this petition for writ of certiorari, seeking review of a trial court order compelling them to submit to an accounting. We quash the order because it was entered without providing the petitioners with notice or an opportunity to be heard on the matter.

Keith Watson filed a motion for an accounting on March 1, 2002. Thereafter, the trial court entered an order granting [1044]*1044the motion on March 5, 2002, without conducting a hearing on the motion. In addition, there was no notice to the petitioners that this motion was being considered. As a result, the trial court’s order departs from the essential requirements of law and the harm caused by the order cannot be effectively cured by an appeal at the conclusion of the proceedings. See Guerin v. Caiazza, 111 So.2d 1217 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); see also Collier Anesthesia, P.A. v. Worden, 726 So.2d 342 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).

Accordingly, we grant certiorari and quash the order requiring an accounting and production of records.

ALTENBERND and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.

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

WHATLEY, Judge.

Spirit Lake Properties, Inc., and Tripp Investments, Inc., filed this petition for writ of certiorari, seeking review of a trial court order compelling them to submit to an accounting. We quash the order because it was entered without providing the petitioners with notice or an opportunity to be heard on the matter.

Keith Watson filed a motion for an accounting on March 1, 2002. Thereafter, the trial court entered an order granting [1044]*1044the motion on March 5, 2002, without conducting a hearing on the motion. In addition, there was no notice to the petitioners that this motion was being considered. As a result, the trial court’s order departs from the essential requirements of law and the harm caused by the order cannot be effectively cured by an appeal at the conclusion of the proceedings. See Guerin v. Caiazza, 111 So.2d 1217 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); see also Collier Anesthesia, P.A. v. Worden, 726 So.2d 342 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999).

Accordingly, we grant certiorari and quash the order requiring an accounting and production of records.

ALTENBERND and STRINGER, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

827 So. 2d 1043, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 14533, 2002 WL 31250309, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/spirit-lake-properties-inc-v-watson-fladistctapp-2002.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack