Stieglitz v. City Commission
525 So. 2d 438, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 864, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1310, 1988 WL 28434
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 5, 1988
DocketNo. 87-522
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases
This text of 525 So. 2d 438 (Stieglitz v. City Commission) 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
Stieglitz v. City Commission, 525 So. 2d 438, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 864, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1310, 1988 WL 28434 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).
Opinion
ON MOTION TO DISMISS
The respondent’s motion to dismiss is granted on the authority of Gelinas v. City of South Miami, 522 So.2d 104 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Paul v. City of Miami Beach, 519 So.2d 1150 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Johnson v. Citizens State Bank, 518 So.2d 410 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). As we did in Gelinas and Paul, we certify the question presented:
WHEN A PARTY SEEKS APPELLATE REVIEW OF A NON-APPEALABLE ORDER, AND ASSUMING THAT THE NOTICE OF APPEAL IS TIMELY FILED IN THE LOWER TRIBUNAL, MUST THE NOTICE OF APPEAL BE FILED IN THE APPELLATE COURT WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RENDITION OF THE ORDER IN ORDER FOR THE APPELLATE COURT TO HAVE JURISDICTION TO TREAT THE NOTICE AS A PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIO-RARI?
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Stieglitz v. City Commission
537 So. 2d 98 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1989)
Downey v. JUNGLE DEN VILLAS REC. ASS'N
525 So. 2d 438 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
525 So. 2d 438, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 864, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1310, 1988 WL 28434, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/stieglitz-v-city-commission-fladistctapp-1988.