169 So. 2d 531 | Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 1964
Petitioners are plaintiffs in an action at law pending in the trial court, and respondent is defendant. Petitioners seek review by certiorari of an interlocutory order entered in that action which denied petitioners’ objections to and motion to strike respondent’s additional defense to count two of the amended complaint, and which denied petitioners’ motion for partial summary judgment as to the issue of liability with respect to said count two. The petition for certiorari alleges that it is based upon two grounds, to wit: firstly, that the
Appeal of interlocutory orders entered in actions at law prior to final judgment may be taken only from those relating to venue or jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.
In the Pullman Company case this Court held that certiorari will be granted to review interlocutory orders entered in law actions prior to final judgment only in those cases in which it clearly appears there is no full, adequate and complete remedy available to the petitioner by appeal after final judgment, as where the trial court has acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction, or its order does not conform to the essential requirements of law and may cause material injury throughout subsequent proceedings for which the remedy by appeal will be inadequate.
. Rule 4.2, F.A.R., 31 F.S.A.
. The Pullman Company v. Fleishel et al. (Fla.App.1958), 101 So.2d 188, 189.