In this Article, the Authors examine the efficacy of the current “onesize-fits-all” three-prong test that Florida’s district courts of appeal apply to non-final orders pending in circuit court cases. The Authors propose that courts instead apply a more functional approach that considers the legitimate and practical reasons for appellate court interference into ongoing trial court cases. The current standard requires that non-final orders constitute a “departure from the essential requirements of law” and demonstrate an “irreparable injury”; however, the Authors note that those subjective standards are often difficult to construe, leaving district courts with little guidance, and invite too much discretion by judges. This Article suggests that a functional approach would more efficiently achieve the goals of certiorari review and make the decision-making process more uniform and transparent-a process that would be more easily understood by both judges and lawyers.