Welsh v. Singletary

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Welsh v. Singletary

686 So. 2d 786, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 206, 1997 WL 20756

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 22, 1997

DocketNo. 96-1023

StatusPublished

This text of 686 So. 2d 786 (Welsh v. Singletary) 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

Welsh v. Singletary, 686 So. 2d 786, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 206, 1997 WL 20756 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel reinstatement of his provisional gain time credits, alleging that he had exhausted his administrative remedies. In its response, the Department of Corrections alleged that he had not. Although the contradictory allegations created a disputed question of fact that could not be resolved on the basis of the pleadings, the trial court summarily dismissed the petition, without offering the petitioner the opportunity to submit evidence that he had filed an administrative grievance.

Because the petition stated a facially sufficient claim for reinstatement under Lancaster v. State, 656 So.2d 533 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), rev. granted, 666 So.2d 901 (Fla.1996), the summary dismissal is reversed. On remand, the trial court should determine first whether appellant has exhausted his administrative remedies, and then consider whether he has demonstrated a right to reinstatement of his gain time.

GUNTHER, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant petitioned for a writ of mandamus to compel reinstatement of his provisional gain time credits, alleging that he had exhausted his administrative remedies. In its response, the Department of Corrections alleged that he had not. Although the contradictory allegations created a disputed question of fact that could not be resolved on the basis of the pleadings, the trial court summarily dismissed the petition, without offering the petitioner the opportunity to submit evidence that he had filed an administrative grievance.

Because the petition stated a facially sufficient claim for reinstatement under Lancaster v. State, 656 So.2d 533 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995), rev. granted, 666 So.2d 901 (Fla.1996), the summary dismissal is reversed. On remand, the trial court should determine first whether appellant has exhausted his administrative remedies, and then consider whether he has demonstrated a right to reinstatement of his gain time.

GUNTHER, C.J., and GLICKSTEIN and PARIENTE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

686 So. 2d 786, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 206, 1997 WL 20756, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/welsh-v-singletary-fladistctapp-1997.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack