ERP OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND EQUITY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, MANAGEMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, APPELLANTS,
v.
PAMELA ANN SUPERDOCK, ALL PRO MAINTENANCE OF TALLAHASSEE, INC., APPELLEES
ERP OPERATING LIMITED PARTNERSHIP AND EQUITY RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, MANAGEMENT LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, APPELLANTS,
PAMELA ANN SUPERDOCK, ALL PRO MAINTENANCE OF TALLAHASSEE, INC., APPELLEES
832 So. 2d 916
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (2002)
Caution
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. See Insurance Company of North America v. Edmondson, 354 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).
MINER, WOLF and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Malu v. Sec. Nat'l Ins. Co., 898 So. 2d 69 (Fla. 2005)…ould not issue declaratory statements that could interfere with pending judicial proceedings. The First District further held that the DOI did not have statutory authority to set [*73] mileage reimbursement rates. Padilla v. Liberty Mutual Ins. Co., 832 So. 2d 916, 920 n. 3 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). In the present appeal, respondents do not assert the doctrine of primary jurisdiction as a basis for affirming the dismissal. Security National explicitly abandoned the claim, Liberty Mutual declared that primary juris…
-
Padilla v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. & Urban Ins. Co. of Pa., 870 So. 2d 827 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003)…if so, to determine such a rate. The DOI dismissed Padilla’s petition, because he “hadn’t demonstrated a present need for declaratory relief.” That ruling was appealed to the First District, which affirmed the dismissal in Padilla v. Liberty Mutual, 832 So. 2d 916, 920 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002), stating, in part: “Here the question of primary jurisdiction was (and is still) at issue in the appeal pending in the Third District, and there was no need or justification for DOI to issue a declaratory statement on that p…
-
Gopman v. Dep't of Educ., 908 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…Statutes, are not properly filed on issues simultaneously litigated in judicial or other administrative proceedings” like the substantial interest hearing to which [*1124] Mr. Gopman is entitled on remand. See also Padilla v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 832 So. 2d 916, 919-20 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). Accordingly, the denial of the request for declaratory statement is affirmed, but the determination that appellant is ineligible for an award as a Florida Academic Scholar is reversed, and the case is remanded for a sec…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Ins. Co. OF N. Am. & J. S. Neviaser v. Edmondson, 354 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)