THE SCHOOL BOARD OF COLLIER COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
FLETCHER, VALENTI & CHILLURA, INC., APPELLEE

Fla. 2d DCA | 1988-12-21
No. 88-2537
SCHEB, A.C.J., and DANAHY and HALL, JJ., concur.
541 So. 2d 1209 Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1988) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We agree with appellant’s contention that the appellee’s actions constitute a waiver of its right to arbitration. See, e.g., Seville Condominium, #1, Inc. v. Clearwater Development Corp., 340 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977), cert. denied, 348 So. 2d 945 (Fla.1977); Ojus Industries, Inc. v. Mann, 221 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969).

Accordingly, we reverse the circuit court’s order referring the case for arbitration and abating the action and remand for further proceedings.

SCHEB, A.C.J., and DANAHY and HALL, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Moody v. Moody, 721 So. 2d 731 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
    …en perfected by the proper service of process and due process notice and an opportunity to be heard on that issue has been had. This succinctly states the requirements of due process in cases such as the instant case. See also, Fisher v. Whiteside, 541 So. 2d 1209 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)(holding that court lacked jurisdiction to modify visitation where it dismissed the modification petition); Brady v. Jones, 491 So. 2d 1272, 1273 (Fla. 2d DCA 1986)(“As the order [terminating visitation] adjudicated issues neither…
  • Yelena N. Langdon v. Langdon, 96 So. 3d 1053 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)
    …g. This modification of time-sharing was contrary to established law. Furthermore, the trial court could not modify time-sharing because it had already dismissed the Former Husband’s modification complaint in the same order. See Fisher v. Whiteside, 541 So. 2d 1209, 1210 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (holding that the court lacked jurisdiction to modify visitation where it dismissed the modification petition). Thus, we reverse the trial court’s order only to the extent that it modified the final order establishing time-s…
  • Foerster v. Kelleen Foerster, 885 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004)
    …court to consider the best interests of the children. Mrs. Foerster’s attorney also suggested that the paternal grandmother should not be the supervisor. These suggestions did not satisfy the pleading or notice requirements. See Fisher v. Whiteside, 541 So. 2d 1209, 1210-11 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (citing Scknicke v. Schnicke, 533 So. 2d 337 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988)). Additionally, the issue of modification was not tried by the express or implied consent of both parties. See Brady, 491 So. 2d at 1273. In fact, Mr. Foer-…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw