History
  • No items yet
midpage
Smithers v. Smithers
743 So. 2d 605
Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
1999
Check Treatment
POLEN, J.

We dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari, as the petitioner/husband has failed to show irreparable harm that cannot be remedied on plenary appeal. See Bared & Co. v. McGuire, 670 So.2d 153 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996). Petitioner seeks relief from an order which denied his motion to bifurcate the issue of his count to annul the purported marriage, and to try that count first. While we are inclined to agree that such a procedure would not only serve judicial economy, but would also dramatically limit the parties’ litigation costs, already in six figures, if the annulment were granted, we cannot say the trial court’s denial was an abuse of discretion. Moreover, we have repeatedly held that time, trouble and expense of proceeding to trial, even if error is ultimately established, does not present that kind of irreparable harm that would invoke our certiorari jurisdiction. Siegel v. Abramowitz, 309 So.2d 234 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975); Continental Equities, Inc. v. Jacksonville Transp. Auth., 558 So.2d 154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990).

DISMISSED.

STONE and KLEIN, JJ., concur.

Case Details

Case Name: Smithers v. Smithers
Court Name: District Court of Appeal of Florida
Date Published: Oct 13, 1999
Citation: 743 So. 2d 605
Docket Number: No. 99-2692
Court Abbreviation: Fla. Dist. Ct. App.
AI-generated responses must be verified and are not legal advice.
Your Notebook is empty. To add cases, bookmark them from your search, or select Add Cases to extract citations from a PDF or a block of text.