Florida District Courts of Appeal, 2000

Neunzig v. Cornett

Neunzig v. Cornett
Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided June 21, 2000 · Stevenson, Taylor, Warner
761 So. 2d 1174; 2000 Fla. App. LEXIS 7554; 2000 WL 790774 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Neunzig v. Cornett

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus without prejudice to petitioner seeking further relief in the trial court. Prior to hearing petitioner’s underlying motion, the trial court properly referred it to mediation, see section 44.102(2)(c), Florida Statutes (1999), and Kurtz v. Kurtz, 538 So.2d 892 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989); petitioner alleges, however, that respondent refused to attend. There is no indication that the trial court was made aware of this alleged fact so the court would then have the opportunity to compel respondent to at*1175tend, set a hearing on the underlying motion regardless of the lack of mediation, or take other appropriate action. This ruling is also without prejudice to petitioner refiling for mandamus relief if, in the future, the trial court delays unreasonably in acting on petitioner’s motion for contempt.

WARNER, C.J., STEVENSON and TAYLOR, JJ., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.