1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. So.2d
  4. 830 So.2d
  5. 830 So.2d 955 (2002)
 

CAMAROTO v. POMAR

Nos. 5D02-1525, 5D02-1527, 5D02-1542, 5D02-1669, 5D02-1670, 5D02-2152.

830 So.2d 955 (2002)

Charles CAMAROTO, Petitioner, v. Louise POMAR, et al., Respondents.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

November 22, 2002.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Charles Camaroto, Apalachicola, pro se.

No Appearance for Respondents.

PER CURIAM.

The several Petitions for Writ of Mandamus are hereby denied. Further, the petitioner is banned from filing further pro se motions or extraordinary petitions for writs in this court. See Isley v. State, 652 So.2d 409, 411 (Fla. 5th DCA 1995). His successive claims, taken in the context of petitioner's other appeals/petitions, constitute an abuse of process. Any further pleadings filed by Charles Camaroto in this...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases