From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Searcy v. Skidmore

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Apr 16, 1991
577 So. 2d 967 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

Opinion

No. 91-82.

March 14, 1991. Rehearing Denied April 16, 1991.

Petition for Writ of Mandamus, A Case of Original Jurisdiction.

Edgar Searcy, Raiford, pro se.

Robert A. Butterworth, Atty. Gen., and James A. Peters, Asst. Atty. Gen., Dept. of Legal Affairs, Tallahassee, for respondent.


In this Petition for Writ of Mandamus, the petitioner would have us order the trial judge to act on a motion under Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540 which, petitioner alleges, he has filed in the trial court. A copy of the docket sheet in this case certified by the clerk of the trial court reveals no motion under Rule 1.540. Accordingly, we deny the Petition for Writ of Mandamus without prejudice to the petitioner filing, if he otherwise can, a timely and authorized motion under Rule 1.540.

PETITION DENIED without prejudice.

COWART, HARRIS and GRIFFIN, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Searcy v. Skidmore

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District
Apr 16, 1991
577 So. 2d 967 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)
Case details for

Searcy v. Skidmore

Case Details

Full title:EDGAR SEARCY, PETITIONER, v. HONORABLE THOMAS D. SKIDMORE, ETC., RESPONDENT

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District

Date published: Apr 16, 1991

Citations

577 So. 2d 967 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)