Case Name: CITY OF MELBOURNE and American Druggists Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Marie Ann FLOYD, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Robert Windell Floyd; Monica Hogan and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Respondents
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1982-05-19
Citations: 415 So. 2d 758
Docket Number: No. 82-360
Parties: CITY OF MELBOURNE and American Druggists Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Marie Ann FLOYD, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Robert Windell Floyd; Monica Hogan and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Respondents.
Judges: COBB and COWART, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 415
Pages: 758–759

Head Matter:
CITY OF MELBOURNE and American Druggists Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Marie Ann FLOYD, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Robert Windell Floyd; Monica Hogan and State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Respondents.
No. 82-360.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.
May 19, 1982.
Rehearing Denied June 17, 1982.
Janet R. DeLaura, of Smalbein, Eubank, Johnson, Rosier & Bussey, P.A., Rockledge, for petitioners.
Sammy Cacciatore, of Nance, Cacciatore & Sisserson, Melbourne, for respondent Floyd.
Thomas G. Kane, of Driscoll, Langston & Kane, P.A., Orlando, for respondents Hogan and State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.

Opinion:
ON PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
DAUKSCH, Chief Judge.
The petition for writ of certiorari seeking relief from an interlocutory order is dismissed on the ground that it was untimely filed. The trial court rendered an order overruling the petitioners' objections to the respondents' requests to produce the internal investigation report of the Melbourne Police Department containing the statement of a police officer involved in the accident, and thus requiring the petitioners to produce said document. The court's order was interlocutory. The petitioners filed a motion for rehearing of the order in the lower court. The filing and pendency of such a motion does not toll the time for filing a petition for common law certiorari under Rule 9.100(c), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. Such a motion does not fall within Rule 9.020(g), Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure and does not toll the rendition date of the original order. Hofer v. Gil de Rubio, 409 So.2d 527 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982); Alimenta (U.S.A.), Inc. v. Pender Peanut Co., 389 So.2d 7 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Gordon v. Barley, 383 So.2d 322 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
The Petition for Writ of Certiorari is DISMISSED.
COBB and COWART, JJ., concur.