BUY™	SELL™	SHOP™
Downloaded From www.TextBookDiscrimination.com
SELL YOUR OWN TEMPLATES (help others get the justice that they deserve)
BUY™	SELL™	SHOP™

STATE OF FLORIDA

[dca] DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

[plfName]	)
Petitioner	)	Case No:	[caseNo]
)	LT No. (FCHR):	[caseNoF]
v.	)	LT No. (DOAH):	[caseNoD]
)
[defName]	)
Respondent	)

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS

[MMM] [D], [YYYY]

[plfName], Petitioner

[plfAddy]

P: [plfPhn]

E: [plfEml]

W: TextBookDiscrimination.com

Get Booked Up on Justice!

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents	iii
Table of Authorities	iv
Preface	vi

Introduction	##
Jurisdictional Basis	##
Statement of Pertinent Facts	##
Analysis: LT’s Dereliction	##
Nature of Relief Sought	##
Argument: 3-Part Test for Mandamus	##
Conclusion	##

Certificate of Compliance	-
Certificate of Service	-

TABLE OF AUTHORITIES

CASES
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Kaklamanos 843 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 2003)	##
Chaky v State 651 So. 2d 1169, 1172 (Fla. 1995)	##
Hatten v State 561 2d 562 (Fla. 1990)	##
Holcomb v Department of Corrections 609 So. 2d 751, 753 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)	##
Huffman v State 813 So. 2d 10, 11 (Fla. 2000)	##
Migliore v. City of Lauderhill 415 So. 2d 62, 63 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)	##
Turner v Singletary 623 So. 2d 537	##
[citation001] [citation001#]	##
[citation002] [citation002#]	##
[citation003] [citation003#]	##

CONSTITUTIONS
Art. I, §21 Fla. Const.	##
Art. V, §3(b)(8) Fla. Const.	##
Art. V, §4(b)(3) Fla. Const.	##
Art. V, §5(b) Fla. Const.	##

STATUTES
§###.## FS	##
§###.## FS	##
§###.## FS	##
§###.## FS	##
§119.0701(4) FS	##
§119.11 FS	##
RULES
9.030(a)(3) Fla. R. App. P.	##
9.030(b)(3) Fla. R. App. P.	##
9.100(e)(2) Fla. R. App. P.	##
9.100(g) Fla. R. App. P.	##
1.630 Fla. R. Civ. P.	##

MISC
Barron’s Dictionary of Legal Terms, 5th Edition, © 2016	##

PREFACE

Petitioner, [plfName], was the plaintiff in the lower tribunal; and will be referred to in this petition as Petitioner. Respondent, [defName], was the defendant below; and will be referred to in this petition as Respondent. Pursuant to Rule 9.100(e)(2) Fla. R. App. P., the [agcyName] is a formal party to this action; and will be referred to as The Agency.

The following references will be used in this petition:

[A___]	Appendix1/

The following abbreviations will also be used:

DCA	District Court of Appeals
FAC	Florida Administrative Code
FCHR	Florida Commission on Human Relations
FS	Florida Statute
LT	Lower Tribunal

All statutory and rule references are made to their 2020 versions (unless otherwise indicated).

I. INTRODUCTION

Pursuant to Rule 9.100 Fla. R. App. P., Petitioner respectfully petitions this Court for a Writ of Mandamus directed to The Agency, and shows the Court the following.

II. JURISDICTIONAL BASIS

This Court has jurisdiction to issue a Writ of Mandamus under Art. V §4(b)(3) Fla. Const., and Rule 9.030(b)(3) Fla. R. App. P.. Mandamus empowers [dca] to command a state agency to complete a ministerial act (see Turner v Singletary, 623 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)).

In the instant case, the state agency involved is the [agcyAbbr]. An organization created by statute (see §[stat001] FS).

Moreover, Mandamus is the proper writ for compelling a lower tribunal to act (see Holcomb v Department of Corrections, 609 So. 2d 751, 753 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Which is the situation in the instant case, as outlined in the statement of facts.

III. STATEMENT OF PERTINENT FACTS

Petition for Declaratory Statement

On [MMMinit] [Dinit], [YYYYinit], Petitioner [didSomething].

[para001]

[para002]

[para003]

On [MMMend] [Dend], [YYYYend], The Agency was supposed to [doSomething].

[para004]

[para005]

[para006]

IV. ANALYSIS

[para007]:

“[cite007]”

[para008]:

“[cite008]”

[para009]:

“[cite009]”

Ministerial Duty

A ministerial act is defined as one that is both required and nondiscretionary (Barron’s Legal Dictionary, 5th Edition, Page 357):

“an act performed according to explicit directions (often embodied in a statute) by a subordinate official, allowing no judgment or discretion on the part of that official. See mandamus.”

[para010]:

“[cite010]”

[para011]

[para012]

[para013]

Factual Application

[para014]

[para015]

[para016]

[para017]

V. NATURE OF RELIEF BEING SOUGHT

On account of The Agency’s dereliction of duty, Petitioner respectfully asks this Honorable Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus to the [agcyName] to have it [doItsJob].

VI. ARGUMENT

Petitioner argues that this Court should issue a Writ of Mandamus because The Agency has failed to complete a mandatory act.

Florida’s Supreme Court established the standard for reviewing such a writ in Huffman v State, 813 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 2000). It stated the following:

“In order to be entitled to a writ of mandamus the petitioner must have a clear legal right to the requested relief, the respondent must have an indisputable legal duty to perform the requested action, and the petitioner must have no other adequate remedy available.”

In other words, a 3-part test for permitting a writ of mandamus must be performed (as outlined here):

Petitioner must have a clear legal right to the requested relief;

The Agency must have an indisputable duty to perform the requested action; and

there must be an absence of any other adequate remedy.

This Petition satisfies all three items, as follows.

Clear Legal Right

Petitioner has a clear legal right to the requested relief.

Requested Relief = [relReq].

Controlling Law = §[###.##] FS.

In Allstate Ins. Co. v Kaklamanos, 843 So. 2d 885 (Fla. 2003), the Supreme Court held that a statute grants someone a clear legal right:

“...’clearly established law’ can derive from a variety of legal sources, including recent controlling case law, rules of court, statutes, and constitutional law.”

Thus, §[###.##] FS provided Petitioner with a clearly established right to a final order from The Agency.

Indisputable Duty to Perform

The Agency has an indisputable duty to [doItsJob].

This petition detailed as much in the analysis section (see ¶13-22).

As an added point, the ruling in Migliore v City of Lauderhill, 415 So. 2d 62 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982) held that ministerial/indisputable duties are ripe for mandamus action:

“It has long been established that mandamus lies to compel the performance of a specific imperative ministerial duty.”

In the instant case, the “specific imperative ministerial duty” is the [doingItsJobRegardingPetitioner].

Thus, the law dictates that The Agency has an ‘indisputable duty’ to [doItsJob].

Proper Remedy

Although §[###.##] FS places a ministerial duty on a state agency to comply, it does not create an opening for a petitioner to compel that agency into action.

When contrasted with other statutes that do provide such an avenue (eg, §119.0701(4) FS “civil action is filed... to compel production of public records...”; and §119.11 FS “action is filed to enforce the provisions of this chapter”) it can be ascertained that no such pathway exists [for §[###.##] FS].

Thus, Petitioner cannot file suit or take any other action to compel The Agency to complete its ministerial duty. His only remedy is this mandamus petition.

Exemplary Case

With all three prongs of the standard-for-review satisfied, Petitioner contends that this petition presents a textbook case for mandamus action.

Another case that can illustrate this is Hatten v State, 561 2d 562 (Fla. 1990). Similar to the instant case, the petitioner in Hatten requested mandamus relief due to a state agency’s dereliction (emphasis added):

“[the state agency agrees] that Hatten's rights are being violated by the inability of the [agency] to prepare and timely file a brief in this case.”

Likewise, Petitioner’s rights are also being violated by The Agency’s failure to prepare and timely render a final order on The Inquiry.

VII. CONCLUSION

WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully asks this Court to issue a Writ of Mandamus commanding [agcyName] to [doItsJobRegardingPetitioner].

Dated this [D]th day of [MMM] [YYYY].

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ [plfName]

[plfName], Petitioner

[plfAddy]

P: [plfPhn]

E: [plfEml]

W: TextBookDiscrimination.com

Get Booked Up on Justice!

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I certify that the size and style of type used in this document is Times New Roman 14-point Font (caption) and Courier New 12-point Font (contents); thus complying with the font requirements of Rule 9.210(a)(2) Fla. R. App. P.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this [D]th day of [MMM] [YYYY], I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk of Courts by using the Florida Courts E-filing Portal which will send a notice of electronic filing to the attached service list.

/s/ [plfName]

Endnotes:

1/ according to the pagination method outlined in Rule 9.220(c)(2) Fla. R. App. P. [A0010] means page 10 from the appendix.

How-To Guide: (interactive)

TextBookDiscrimination.com/Guides/Petitions/Mandamus.html

SERVICE LIST

[clrkNm], Agency Clerk [clrkEml]@fchr.myflorida.com Florida Commission on Human Relations Room 110 4075 Esplanade Way Tallahassee, Florida 32399-7020 (agency)

BUY™	SELL™	SHOP™
Downloaded From www.TextBookDiscrimination.com
SELL YOUR OWN TEMPLATES (help others get the justice that they deserve)
BUY™	SELL™	SHOP™