CYNTHIA C. PALACIO, APPELLANT,
v.
FRANCISCO PALACIO, APPELLEE
CYNTHIA C. PALACIO, APPELLANT,
FRANCISCO PALACIO, APPELLEE
550 So. 2d 1135
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1989)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 11 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
The order under review does not involve an abuse of discretion and is therefore affirmed. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla.1980). The stay heretofore entered is vacated instanter. Rehearing is dispensed with.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
Lincoln Ins. Co. v. Home Emergency Servs., Inc., 812 So. 2d 433 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…rrence,” defined as “an accident.” 4[e.s.] Because, even when policy interpretation is not involved, and all the more when it is, the term “an” or “a” means “any,” State v. Hershkowitz, 714 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Izadi v. Machado Ford, Inc., 550 So. 2d 1135, 1138 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co. v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 369 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), the “occurrence” or “accident” referred to must include the July 7, 1995 ladder collapse which injured the pla…
-
Juan Castillo-Plaza, M.D. v. Green, 655 So. 2d 197 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…y. In this regard, it is well established, in accordance with the ordinary rules of grammar and rhetoric, that the word “a,” as repeatedly and exclusively used in the operative portions of the statute, means “any.” Izadi v. Machado (Gus) Ford, Inc., 550 So. 2d 1135, 1138 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); State ex rel. Roberts v. Snyder, 149 Ohio St. 333, 78 N.E. 2d 716 (1948); First Am. Nat’l Bank v. Olsen, 751 S.W. 2d 417 (Tenn.1987), appeal dismissed, 485 U.S. 1001, 108 S.Ct. 1460, 99 L.Ed.2d 691 (1988); see United […
-
State v. Hershkowitz, 714 So. 2d 545 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)…ear that the lower court’s ruling is both totally unsupported by the language of section 934.07 and directly contrary to that of section 934.03(2)(c) which indeed refers to obtaining evidence of “a”— meaning “any,” Izadi v. Machado (Gus) Ford, Inc., 550 So. 2d 1135, 1138 n. 3 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) — “criminal act.” Moreover, it defies the plain thrust of the scheme adopted by the legislature, which commonsensibly provides more stringent requirements for a wiretap than for a consensual interception such as those i…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So. 2d 1197 (Fla. 1980)