Opinion
No. SC07-71.
July 16, 2007.
Lower Tribunal No. 1D06-1723.
To the extent petitioner seeks review of the decision of the First District Court of Appeal to deny his request for a written opinion in Case No. 1D06-1723, the "Petition Pursuant to Florida Constitution Article V, § 3(7)" is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction. See R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Kenyon, 882 So. 2d 986, 988 (Fla. 2004) (stating that "we will dismiss all extraordinary writ petitions, regardless of how they are designated, in which the petition requests that this Court review a district court's denial of a request for a written opinion made pursuant to rule 9.330(a) and the denial does not include any elaboration, citation, or explanation that would give this Court jurisdiction").
To the extent petitioner seeks mandamus relief in the form of an order compelling the First District Court of Appeal to issue a written opinion in Case No. 1D06-1723, the "Petition Pursuant to Florida Constitution Article V, § 3(7)" is denied because petitioner has failed to show a clear legal right to the relief requested. See Huffman v. State, 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000) (stating that in order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus, petitioner must show clear legal right to performance of requested act, that respondent has indisputable legal duty to perform that act, and that no other adequate remedy exists); Sch. Bd. of Pinellas County v. Dist. Court of Appeal, 467 So. 2d 985, 986 (Fla. 1985).
The "Petition for Writ Quo Warranto Directed to Thomas Hall, Clerk of the Florida Supreme Court" is hereby dismissed as moot.
LEWIS, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.