SUNSET COMMERCIAL BANK, APPELLANT,
v.
PYRAMIDS DEVELOPMENT CORP., JOSE I. MACIA, AND CLAUDIO ALVAREZ, APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Petition For Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We are unable to concur in appellant’s construction of the supersedeas bond and instead agree with the interpretation given by the trial court. On this record, this bond was intended to encompass appellate review by any appropriate means, including the petition for certiorari filed by appellant.1 If we accept appellant’s invitation to read the terms of the bond in a strictly technical sense, then appellant breached its obligations when it sought review of the trial court’s May 5, 1988 order by certiorari rather than by appeal.2 Under either approach, appellees prevail.
Affirmed.
. The supersedeas bond was drafted by the parties and approved by the trial court.
. As the May 5 order was a nonappealable non-final order, an appeal pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.130 would have been dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kopf v. City OF Miami Beach, 653 So. 2d 1046 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)…), review denied, 601 So. 2d 553 (Fla.1992); Hogan v. Chupka, 579 So. 2d 395, 397 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991) (citing Restatement (Second) of Torts § 343A; negligent maintenance of sidewalk and pavement in front of store exit); Gloris v. Williams Paving Co., 556 So. 2d 748, 749 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (citing [*1049] Restatement (Second) of Torts § 343A; pedestrian proceeded into area where sidewalk under construction; factual issue remained regarding whether defendant had negligently obstructed only available pathway); cf…1 / 2
-
Warren v. State, 559 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…CA 1983); see Camillo v. Department of Transp., 546 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), review denied, 547 So. 2d 1209 (Fla.1989). Compare Pope v. Cruise Boat Co., 380 So. 2d 1151 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980) (pedestrian). Compare also Gloris v. Williams Paving Co., 556 So. 2d 748 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (pedestrian). The record thus presents jury questions as to whether her riding the bike was either only comparatively negligent, or not contributorily negligent at all, and whether, conversely, the DOT’s negligence as to the sidew…
-
Boyle v. Hernando Beach S. Prop. Owners Ass'n, Inc., 124 So. 3d 317 (Fla. 5th DCA 2013)…it may reverse that part and affirm the other part. See, e.g., Cintron v. Bankers Trust Co., 682 So. 2d 616, 616-17 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Sec. Ins. Co. of Hartford v. Baad, 657 So. 2d 10, 10-11 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995); Gloris v. Williams Paving Co., Inc., 556 So. 2d 748, 749 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Boyle argues that the summary judgment evidence in the record does not indicate how he was in violation of the Agreement. Regarding the landscaping and trees, we agree. The affidavits submitted by the Association merely par…