Winslow v. Winslow

118 So. 3d 841, 2013 WL 2395094, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8767
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedJune 3, 2013
DocketNo. 1D13-0452
StatusPublished

This text of 118 So. 3d 841 (Winslow v. Winslow) 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
Winslow v. Winslow, 118 So. 3d 841, 2013 WL 2395094, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8767 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Because petitioner has failed to show that he has brought the pending motion to the attention of the trial court or made an express and distinct demand for performance, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. See Thomas v. State, Dep’t of Revenue, 74 So.3d 145 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011); Al-Hakim v. State, 783 So.2d 293 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001).

BENTON, C.J., RAY and MAKAR, JJ, concur.

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

Related

Al-Hakim v. State
783 So. 2d 293 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Thomas v. State, Department of Revenue
74 So. 3d 145 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2011)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
118 So. 3d 841, 2013 WL 2395094, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 8767, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/winslow-v-winslow-fladistctapp-2013.