From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lomax v. Capital

Supreme Court of Florida
Apr 19, 2007
957 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 2007)

Opinion

No. SC06-2393.

April 19, 2007.

Lower Tribunal No. 3D06-2299.


Because petitioner has failed to show a clear legal right to the relief requested, she is not entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus and the supplement thereto are hereby denied. 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).

Any motions or other requests for relief are also denied.

ANSTEAD, PARIENTE, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Lomax v. Capital

Supreme Court of Florida
Apr 19, 2007
957 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 2007)
Case details for

Lomax v. Capital

Case Details

Full title:MATTIE LOMAX v. CAPITAL RENTAL AGENCY, ET AL

Court:Supreme Court of Florida

Date published: Apr 19, 2007

Citations

957 So. 2d 636 (Fla. 2007)

Citing Cases

Lomax v. Taylor

Petitioner has failed to show cause why she should not be so sanctioned. See Lomax v. Capital Rental Agency,…

Lomax v. Officer Reynolds of Miami Police Dep't

Lomax v. Capital Rental Agency, Inc., 954 So.2d 1170 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007) (certiorari denied) Lomax v. Capital…