Case ID: so2d_560/html/0358-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "GOSHORN, Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

STATE AUTOMOBILE MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Robert QUARLES, et al., Respondents.
    No. 89-1751.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
    April 26, 1990.
    
       W. Lane Neilson of Neilson and Associates, Orlando, for petitioner.
    Charles Rand of Jacobs & Goodman, Al-tamonte Springs and Barbara Green of Freidin, Hirsch & Green, P.A., Miami, for respondents.
    
      
      . Travelers Insurance Company v. Bruns, 443 So.2d 959 (Fla.1984); Sunshine Dodge v. Ketchem, 445 So.2d 395 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984), disapproved on other grounds, Maryland Casualty Co. v. Reliance Insurance Co., 478 So.2d 1068 (Fla.1985).
    
   ON MOTION FOR REHEARING AND/OR CLARIFICATION

GOSHORN, Judge.

Petitioner’s motion for clarification of our denial of its petition for certiorari is granted. The order granting respondents’ motion, for summary judgment entered in this cause totally disposes of the claim against the petitioner and will be directly appealable when a final judgment is entered. Fla.R.App.P. 9.110(k). The cases cited in support of the petition for certiora-ri are inapposite as applied to the facts of this case.

Because the petitioner has an adequate remedy by way of appeal, certiorari is not available. See, e.g., Bohan v. Cal, 524 So.2d 1111 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Vicorp Restaurants, Inc. v. Aridi, 510 So.2d 1082 (Fla. 1st DCA), review denied, 519 So.2d 988 (Fla.1987); National Beverage Suppliers, Inc. v. Esquire Products of Florida, Inc., 493 So.2d 551 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986); Bowl America Florida, Inc. v. Schmidt, 386 So.2d 1203 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Accordingly, the motion for rehearing is

DENIED.

DANIEL, C.J., and COWART, J., concur.