Summary
explaining that declining to issue a writ of certiorari for failure to demonstrate a departure from the essential requirements of the law should not be considered as approving the ruling of the trial judge or establishing law of the case
Summary of this case from Barker v. BarkerOpinion
No. 62-701.
November 28, 1962. Rehearing Denied December 20, 1962.
Petition from the Circuit Court of Dade County, William A. Meadows, Jr., J.
Prebish DuVal, Miami, for petitioner.
Robert D. Zahner, City Atty., John S. Lloyd and Harry Stein, Asst. City Attys., for respondent.
Before PEARSON, C.J., and BARKDULL and HENDRY, JJ.
Certiorari dismissed.
On Petition for Rehearing
It appears from the petition for rehearing filed by the petitioner, seeking review of this court's prior order dismissing petitioner's petition for certiorari, that there is some confusion in the trial court as to the effect to be given to our prior order of dismissal.
The petition for rehearing is denied, but neither the denial of this petition nor the dismissal of the original petition for certiorari are to be considered as determinative of the question involved. Neither is the dismissal of the petition for certiorari to be considered as establishing the law of the case nor approving the actions of the trial judge in striking the claim for punitive damages against the respondent City. The petition for certiorari was dismissed for failure to demonstrate a departure by the trial judge from the essential requirements of the law sufficient to invoke the jurisdiction of this court under such original proceedings.
Petition for rehearing denied.