Mintz Truppman, P.A. v. Cozen O'Connor, PLC

Summary

The court held that prohibition was improperly used to undo a trial court’s exercise of jurisdiction over claims involving an affirmative defense. Because the alleged collateral-estoppel issue concerned the merits of claims within the circuit court’s subject-matter jurisdiction, the issue could not be converted into a prohibition proceeding merely because the trial court denied a motion to dismiss. The court quashed the decision below and remanded for consideration of the previously unresolved certiorari arguments.