Legal Opinion
Kobayashi v. Kobayashi
Supreme Court of Florida
Decided December 7, 2000No. SC92811PublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
777 So.2d 951 (2000)
Hiroaki KOBAYASHI, Petitioner,
v.
Hollis M. KOBAYASHI, Respondent.
No. SC92811.
Supreme Court of Florida.
December 7, 2000.
Rehearing Denied January 29, 2001.
ORDER
Petitioner Hiroaki Kobayashi seeks, through a writ of mandamus, the reinstatement of his appeal in the Third District Court of Appeal. To be entitled to a writ of mandamus, the petitioner must show a clear legal right to the performance by the respondent of a particular duty. See Fasenmyer v. Wainwright, 230 So.2d 129 (Fla.1969). The petition does not make a sufficient showing that the district court failed to perform…
Also in this document: Dissent · Shaw; Dissent · Pariente.
2Cases cited18 opinions
- Moore v. Florida Parole and Probation CommissionSupreme Court of Florida · 1974
- State v. Fourth Dist. Court of AppealSupreme Court of Florida · 1997
- State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance v. Judges of the District Court of Appeal, Fifth DistrictSupreme Court of Florida · 1981
- Pino v. District Court of Appeal, Third DistrictSupreme Court of Florida · 1992
- City of Miami Beach v. Mr. Samuel's, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1977
13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Tyson v. the Florida BarSupreme Court of Florida · 2002
- Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corp. v. CarnotoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003