Page 1 of 4

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF FLORIDA ____________________ Supreme Court Case No.: SC16-9472D DCA. Case No.: 2D14-15116 Circuit Case No.: 00- 005682-CI-78

th

 ____________________ CHURCH OF SCIENTOLOGY FLAG SERVICE ORGANIZATION, INC.,

 Petitioner,

versusKENNAN G. DANDAR and DANDAR & DANDAR, P.A.,

 Respondents. __________________________________ 

RESPONDENTS’ MOTION TO DISMISS DUE TO MOOTNESS

Respondents, KENNAN GEORGE DANDAR AND DANDAR & DANDAR,P.A., move to dismiss this appeal due to the mootness of the matter resulting from theCircuit Court complying with the Mandate of the Second District Court of Appeal invacating the Final Judgment due to a complete absence of jurisdiction, and thePetitioner failing to preserve this matter now pending before this Court by failing totimely request a stay of the Mandate with the Second District Court of Appeal. Thegrounds for this motion are as follows:1.The “matter” is a never filed, hand-delivered motion in 2009 to the last presiding judge in a wrongful death case dismissed with prejudice by the filing of a

Filing # 44565988 E-Filed 07/28/2016 04:14:12 PM

RECEIVED, 07/28/2016 04:18:29 PM, Clerk, Supreme Court

 

Page 2 of 4

stipulation of dismissal in 2004. The Respondents were the attorneys for the Estateof Lisa McPherson in the wrongful death case, and the case was dismissed without theentry of any order by the Circuit Court. 2.When the Petitioner believed the Respondents breached the settlementagreement in 2009 by filing a new wrongful death case for another client against thePetitioner, the Petitioner simply hand delivered a motion to the retired judge who presided in the closed case, rather than file a new suit. Petitioner did not even file themotion with the Clerk of Court.3.In 2014, after a final money judgment was entered in favor of Petitioner for the alleged violation of the settlement agreement by filing the new unrelatedwrongful death case, the Respondents appealed. 4.The opinion of the Second District Court of Appeal finding a completedivestiture of jurisdiction upon the filing of the Joint Voluntary Dismissal withPrejudice in 2004 was issued on March 2, 2016.5.The order denying rehearing was issued on May 9, 2016.6.The Mandate was issued on May 25, 2016.7The Petitioner filed a Notice to Invoke this Court’s jurisdiction on May27, 2016.

 

Page 3 of 4

8.On June 1, 2016, Petitioner filed a motion for stay pending appeal withthe Circuit Court, which was denied due to the lack of jurisdiction.9.On July 6, 2016, Petitioner filed a motion for stay with the District Courtin response to Respondent’s motion to compel the Circuit Court to comply with theMandate.10.The District Court denied both motions, and directed the Respondent tofile a motion with the Circuit Court to comply with the Mandate.11.Upon Respondent’s filing of the motion with the Circuit Court, theCircuit Court granted the motion and dismissed the case on July 21, 2016 for lack of  jurisdiction, and vacated the final judgment which is the subject matter of the appealto this Court.

The July 21, 2016 Order is attached to this motion.MEMORANDUM OF LAW

The judgment on review is in the nature of a monetary judgment.This court has concluded that it does not have the power to withholdissuance of mandate in such a case when the motion to stay is filed morethan fifteen days after the issuance of the opinion and no timely motionfor rehearing has been filed pursuant to Florida Rule of AppellateProcedure 9.330(a). See Fla. R. App. P. 9.340;

State ex rel. Price v. McCord,

 380 So. 2d 1037 (Fla. 1980); see also

State v. Miyasato

, 805 So.2d 818 (Fla. 2d DCA 2001). Because this court is required to issue itsmandate upon the expiration of the fifteen-day period established in rule9.340, the court has concluded that it does not have authority thereafter to withdraw its mandate in order to stay a judgment except perhaps uponsome extraordinary showing not present in this case.

 Doyle-Vallery v. Aranibar 

, 838 So. 2d 1200, 1201 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).