Opinion

Neeley v. CW Roberts Contracting, Inc.

2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 986 · District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jan 30, 2007

Full text

Seth NEELEY as Personal Representative of the Estate of Amanda Neeley v. CW ROBERTS CONTRACTING, INCORPORATED and Wilson Brandon Lewis

PER CURIAM. Petitioner seeks certiorari review of an order of the circuit court denying his motions to compel discovery. As we have repeatedly observed, orders having the effect of denying discovery are almost invariably not reviewable by certiorari because of the absence of irreparable harm. See Boyd v. Pheo, Inc., 664 So.2d 294 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Esman v. Bd. of Regents, 425 So.2d 156 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Inasmuch as any error by the circuit court will be readily remediable on appeal, this case presents no basis for departing from this general rule. Accordingly, the petition for writ of certiorari is DENIED. BARFIELD, VAN NORTWICK, and THOMAS, JJ., concur.

Notice

Freecase is a legal research tool. It does not determine whether a case is good law and does not provide legal advice.

Metadata

Status: Published
Author
Judges: Barfield, Nortwick, Thomas
Cluster ID: 7843770

Citations

2007 Fla. App. LEXIS 986
948 So. 2d 844
2007 WL 216432

Cited by

AMERICAN PRIME TITLE SERVICES, LLC v. ZHI WANG
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Feb 3, 2021
State v. Foley
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Mar 30, 2016
Damsky & Damsky v. University of Miami and Livingstone, M.D.
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Dec 10, 2014
Bill Kasper Construction Co. v. Morrison
District Court of Appeal of Florida · Jun 8, 2012

Parentheticals

“[0]rders having the effect of denying discovery are almost invariably not reviewable by certiorari because of the absence of irreparable harm.”
State v. Foley
orders denying discovery almost invariably not reviewable by certiorari because of absence of irreparable harm
Bill Kasper Construction Co. v. Morrison