Miami-Dade County v. King , 2015 Fla. App. LEXIS 14887 ( 2015 )

Third District Court of Appeal
State of Florida
Opinion filed October 7, 2015.
Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D15-1099
Lower Tribunal No. 11-4024
________________
Miami-Dade County,
Petitioner,
vs.
Adrian King,
Respondent.
A Writ of Certiorari to the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Gill S.
Freeman, Judge.
R.A. Cuevas, Jr., Miami-Dade County Attorney, and Eric Rodriguez and
William X. Candela, Assistant County Attorneys, for petitioner.
David H. Charlip, for respondent.
Before SUAREZ, C.J., and EMAS and FERNANDEZ, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration, we conclude that this court lacks jurisdiction, and
dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari. See Lowenstein, Inc. v. Draheim, 898
So. 2d 1129 (Fla. 4th DCA 2005) (dismissing appeal of order vacating arbitration
award as one taken from a nonfinal, nonappealable order, and noting that certiorari
jurisdiction is not appropriate because Lowenstein had not suffered irreparable
harm that could not be remedied on direct appeal); Zabawa v. Penna, 868 So. 2d
1292 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) (dismissing petition for writ of certiorari from order
vacating arbitration award because petitioner could not show irreparable harm
irremediable on direct appeal). Contra Felger v. Mock, 65 So. 3d 625 (Fla. 1st
DCA 2011) (granting certiorari review of order vacating arbitration award,
analogizing said order to one granting a motion for new trial). But see Heart
Surgery Center v. Bixler, 128 So. 3d 169, 173 n.2 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (the panel
acknowledged that Felger is the controlling authority within the First District and
authorized certiorari review of an order vacating an arbitration award, but observed
that “for the reasons explained in Judge Benton’s dissent in Felger [65 So. 3d at
626], we believe that Felger is wrongly decided on such issue. . . . Here, in our
view, any harm caused by the order under review can be remedied on direct appeal
of a final order in this case.”)
2