Thomas R. Becnel, and DRB etc. v. AIZ Holdings, LLC , 240 So. 3d 904 ( 2018 )

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
STATE OF FLORIDA
_____________________________
No. 1D17-3686
_____________________________
THOMAS R. BECNEL and DRB
DEVELOPMENT, LLC,
Petitioners,
v.
AIZ HOLDINGS, LLC,
Respondent.
_____________________________
Petition for Writ of Certiorari—Original Jurisdiction.
April 25, 2018
PER CURIAM.
Petitioners, Thomas R. Becnel and DRB Development, LLC,
seek certiorari review of an order granting a motion to compel
discovery filed by Respondent, AIZ Holdings, LLC, and denying
DRB’s motion to quash. Because we agree with Respondent that
Petitioners are unable to show irreparable harm, we dismiss the
petition. See W. Fla. Reg’l Med. Ctr., Inc. v. See, 18 So. 3d 676, 682
(Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (noting that a petitioner seeking certiorari
review must demonstrate a departure from the essential
requirements of the law resulting in irreparable harm that cannot
be remedied on appeal and that the irreparable harm element
must be addressed first because it is an issue of jurisdiction), aff’d,
79 So. 3d 1 (Fla. 2012); see also Bd. of Trs. of the Internal
Improvement Tr. Fund v. Am. Educ. Enters., LLC, 99 So. 3d 450,
456 (Fla. 2012) (explaining that overbreadth in the context of
discovery is not a sufficient basis for certiorari relief); Heekin v. Del
Col, 60 So. 3d 437, 438-39 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011) (noting that an order
compelling production of relevant financial information cannot be
the object of a writ of certiorari because there is no irreparable
harm).
DISMISSED.
LEWIS, KELSEY, and WINSOR, JJ., concur.
_____________________________
Not final until disposition of any timely and
authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or
9.331.
_____________________________
Dana C. Matthews and John M. Stratton of Matthews & Jones,
LLP, Destin, for Petitioners.
Laurence J. Pino of Pino Nicolson, PLLC, Orlando; Stephen D.
Milbrath and Tucker H. Byrd of Byrd Campbell, P.A., Winter Park,
for Respondent.
2