Opinion
No. SC11–1622.
2012-03-12
Neil J. GILLESPIE, Petitioner(s) v. BARKER, RODEMS & COOK, et al., Respondent(s).
The petitioner has filed a petition for writ of mandamus with the Court. To the extent the petitioner seeks a writ of mandamus directed towards the district court, the petition is denied because a writ of mandamus cannot be issued to direct the manner in which a court shall act in the lawful exercise of its jurisdiction. State ex rel. North St. Lucie River Drainage Dist. v. Kanner, 11 So.2d 889, 890 (Fla.1943); see also Migliore v. City of Lauderhill, 415 So.2d 62, 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) (stating that mandamus “is not an appropriate vehicle for review of a merely erroneous decision nor is it proper to mandate the doing (or undoing) of a discretionary act”), approved, 431 So.2d 986 (Fla.1983). To the extent the petitioner seeks any additional relief, the petition is dismissed as facially insufficient.