Petition for Writ of Certiorari to Review
Quasi-Judicial Action: Agencies, Boards, and Commissions of Local Government: ZONING –appellate court can only deny the writ or
quash the order under review- the reviewing court does not have authority to
take any action resulting in the entry of a judgment or orders on the merits or
direct any particular judgment or order be entered-court may not quash only
part of an order; that would in effect amount to a new order- Petition denied. Three H Learning Center, Inc., v.
IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SIXTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT
OF THE STATE OF
THREE H LEARNING CENTER, INC.
vs. Case No: 2003-1099CA
a Political Subdivision of the State of
ORDER DENYING PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
THIS CAUSE came before the Court on the Petition for Writ of Certiorari, the Response and the Reply. Upon consideration of the same, the record, and being otherwise fully advised, the Court finds that the Petition must be denied as set forth below.
1999, Petitioner sent a proposal to the zoning administrator to purchase
certain property in an A-R district in order to build offices and operate what
is described as an educational training
facility. In July1999, the zoning
administrator agreed to allow the building of the offices required to operate
the school since the corporation fit within the property classification. Petitioner purchased the property in August
1999. Subsequently, the zoning
administrator received complaints from adjoining neighbors about sign
manufacturing on the property. In
January 2001, the zoning administrator made a determination that sign
manufacturing did not fall within the scope of the Land Development Code. Petitioner appealed that determination to the
Board of County Commissioners of
has filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in which he requests this Court
quash only certain portions of the Order.  However, Petitioner has not provided, nor has
this Court found, any authority under which it may grant certiorari quashing
only part of an order entered by the BOCC. Moreover, if this Court were to grant
such relief, it would create an apparent conflict with Broward County v. GBV, 787 So. 2d 838 (
explaining the limited review afforded on a certiorari petition, the Court cited
to Snyder v.
this Court's determination that it may not quash only part of an order on a
petition for writ of certiorari is further supported by the language in Tamiami Trail Tours v. Railroad Com'n
Specifically, Tamiami held that "when an order is quashed it leaves the subject matter, that is, the controversy pending before the tribunal, commission, or administrative authority, as if no order or judgment had been entered and the parties stand upon the pleadings and proof as it existed when the order was made with the rights of all parties to proceed further as they may be advised to protect or obtain the enjoyment of their rights under the law in the same manner and to the same extent which they might have proceeded had the order reviewed not been entered." Id at 31-32; 174 So. 454. If this Court were to quash only part of the order in this case, the subject matter would not be pending as if no order or judgment had been entered. To the contrary, there would be a new order.
this Court declines to grant Petitioner's relief because as discussed above, an
appellate court on certiorari review can only deny the writ or quash the order
under review. It has no authority to take any action resulting in the entry of
a judgment or order on the merits or to direct that any particular judgment or
order be entered. GBV, 787 So. 2d 838 (
Therefore, it is,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Petition for Writ of Certiorari is DENIED.
AND ORDERED in Chambers, at New Port Richey,
Copies furnished to:
Timothy Patrick Driscoll, P.A.
 Specifically, Petitioner request this Court quash paragraphs 2.a (a portion thereof), b,d,e, and f of the Order.