STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY; KATHLEEN TATAR; JANET RYCHCIK AND XYZ INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY; KATHLEEN TATAR; JANET RYCHCIK AND XYZ INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLEES
474 So. 2d 1206
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fifth District (1985)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Allstate Ins. Co. of Canada v. Value Rent-A-Car of Florida, Inc., 463 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Reliance Ins. Co. v. Maryland Casualty Co., 453 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984).
COBB, C.J., FRANK D. UPCHURCH, Jr., J., and LEE, R.E., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Deep S. Sys., Inc. v. Heath, 843 So. 2d 378 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003)…at Quality has the experience, knowledge, and skill to install and use materials and items used in the instal [*381] lation of roofing and qualifies as a “roofing contractor” under the plain language of section 489.105(3)(e). Cf. Terranova v. State, 474 So. 2d 1206, 1208 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985) (affirming trial court’s finding that a person who applies sealant to a roof, cleans the gravel off the roof, replaces portions of the roof, and installs felt on a roof is a “roofing contractor” under section 489.105(3)(e));…
-
DeBIASI v. S & S Builders, Inc., 593 So. 2d 314 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…), Florida Statutes (1989) was issued. And appellant produced the affidavit from the records custodian that DPR had no record of it. This certificate of non-licensure was prima facie proof that no certificate had been issued. See Terranova v. State, 474 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); see also section 90.803(10), Florida Statutes (1989). The statute requires that a business be duly certified before it engages in the contracting business, section 489.127(l)(f), Florida Statutes (1989). The definitions of that c…
-
State v. Malarney, 617 So. 2d 739 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…e felony was improper, and I would remand this cause for a new trial on the original capital sexual battery charge. I agree that the exclusion of the Texas defense witness testimony was error. See § 90.803(10), Fla.Stat. (1989); Terranova v. State, 474 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985); Williams v. State, 406 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Jones v. State, 577 So. 2d 606 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). However, I can not agree that the trial court erred in excluding testimony of the defense psychologist. In the proffered t…
Authorities Cited
- Allstate Ins. Co. OF Canada v. Value Rent-A-Car OF Fla., Inc., 463 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)
- Reliance Ins. Co. & Bob Salmon, Inc. v. Md. Cas. Co., 453 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)