Case ID: so2d_670/html/0111-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Katie D. TUCKER, Petitioner, v. Donald George RESHA, Jr., Respondent.
    No. 92-1744.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    Feb. 28, 1996.
    Rehearing Denied April 10, 1996.
    Brian S. Duffy & Mary L. Wakeman, of MeConnaughhay, Roland, Maida & Cherr, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant.
    Richard E. Johnson, of Spriggs & Johnson; William A. Friedlander, Tallahassee, for Ap-pellee.
   ORDER ON REMAND

PER CURIAM.

In accordance with the controlling opinion issued by the Supreme Court of Florida in Tucker v. Resha, 648 So.2d 1187 (Fla.1994), which set out the proper standard for reviewing the order entered by the trial court, we deny the petition. Id. at 1190 (holding that “an order denying summary judgment based upon a claim of qualified immunity is subject to interlocutory review to the extent that the order turns on an issue of law”). See also Johnson v. Jones, — U.S. -, -, 115 S.Ct. 2151, 2156, 132 L.Ed.2d 238 (1995); Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530, 105 S.Ct. 2806, 2817, 86 L.Ed.2d 411 (1985) (denial of qualified immunity, to the extent it turns on an issue of law, is an appealable final decision).

PETITION DENIED.

MINER, MICKLE and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., concur.