Case ID: so2d_779/html/0661-03.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. POLSTON, J.,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

BOB DANCE JEEP EAGLE, INC., and Fairway Jeep Eagle, Inc., Petitioners, v. DAIMLERCHRYSLER MOTORS CORPORATION and East Orlando Chrysler Jeep, Inc., Respondents.
    No. 1D01-0847.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    March 19, 2001.
    
      Thomas P. Crapps of the Douglass Law Firm, Tallahassee, for petitioners.
    Dean Bunch of Sutherland, Asbill & Brennan, Tallahassee, for respondents.
   PER CURIAM.

DENIED. The petition for writ of cer-tiorari is denied because there is an insufficient showing of an absence of an adequate remedy on appeal.

WOLF and DAVIS, JJ., concur; POLSTON, J., concurring with written opinion.

POLSTON, J.,

concurring.

The order denying the parties’ joint motion for a continuance may have been in error. Nevertheless, it is too speculative to expect that respondents would invest and potentially lose “millions of dollars” in building a new dealership while any ruling in respondents’ favor for a new dealership was on appeal and subject to reversal. Boca Raton Artificial Kidney Center, Inc. v. Florida Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, et al., 475 So.2d 260, 261 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)(applicant “assumes the risk” if it builds a facility prior to completion of the process). Without the construction of the dealership, there is no harm to the petitioners.