From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Stephens v. Dickens

Supreme Court of Florida.
Mar 27, 2012
134 So. 3d 451 (Fla. 2012)

Opinion

No. SC11–2290.

2012-03-27

David Terrance STEPHENS, Petitioner(s) v. Orlester DICKENS, et al., Respondent(s).


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, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. 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).

PARIENTE, QUINCE, POLSTON, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Stephens v. Dickens

Supreme Court of Florida.
Mar 27, 2012
134 So. 3d 451 (Fla. 2012)
Case details for

Stephens v. Dickens

Case Details

Full title:David Terrance STEPHENS, Petitioner(s) v. Orlester DICKENS, et al.…

Court:Supreme Court of Florida.

Date published: Mar 27, 2012

Citations

134 So. 3d 451 (Fla. 2012)