HARDIN v. HEYL TRUCK LINES INC CBCS (2022)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Eugene HARDIN, Petitioner, v. HEYL TRUCK LINES, INC., CBCS, Travelers Indemnity Company of America, and Eric M. Christiansen, Respondents.

No. 1D22-700

Decided: May 11, 2022

Eugene Hardin, pro se, Petitioner. Eric M. Christiansen, pro se, Respondent. No appearance for Respondents Heyl Truck Lines, Inc., CBCS, or Travelers Indemnity Company of America.

The petitioner fails to make out any facial basis for the extraordinary relief he seeks. See State ex rel. Hendricks v. Hunt, 70 So. 2d 301, 306 (Fla. 1954) (dismissing petition because “prohibition is not the proper remedy to correct alleged past abuses but only to forestall an impending, present injury” (internal quotation and citation omitted)); State ex rel. R. C. Motor Lines, Inc. v. Boyd, 114 So. 2d 169, 170 (Fla. 1959) (explaining “that prohibition is a preventive rather than a corrective remedy,” and “issues only to prevent the commission of an act,” not “to revoke an order already issued”; or putting it differently, prohibition “is used to prohibit the doing of something, rather than to compel the undoing of something already done”).

Dismissed.

Per Curiam.

Roberts, Osterhaus, and Tanenbaum, JJ., concur.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network