DEANNA DOYLE-VALLERY, M.D., ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
JULIE B. ARANIBAR, ET VIR., RESPONDENTS

Fla. | 2005-01-20
No. SC03-359
PARIENTE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.
894 So. 2d 875 Florida Supreme Court (2005) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

We have for review the decision in Doyle-Vallery v. Aranibar, 838 So. 2d 1198 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003), which certified conflict with the decision in Allstate Insurance Co. v. Sarkis, 809 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001), which this Court subsequently approved in Sarkis v. Allstate Insurance Co., 863 So. 2d 210 (Fla.2003). We have jurisdiction. See art. V, § 3(b)(4), Fla. Const. We accept jurisdiction in this case, summarily quash the decision of the Second District Court of Appeal, and remand for reconsideration in light of our decision in Sarkis.

It is so ordered.

PARIENTE, C.J., and WELLS, ANSTEAD, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANTERO, and BELL, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …he reasons we gave at the time for declining to adopt this mandate were “[bjecause of the potential financial impact of the amendment ... and our desire to work cooperatively with the Legislature.” Amendments to the Fla. Rules of Juvenile Procedure, 894 So. 2d 875, 880-81 (Fla.2005). Now, the majority has decided to go ahead and adopt this amendment to rule 8.165(a). Instead of imposing this substantive change by amending a procedural rule, I believe we should continue to follow the recommendation of the Com…
    1 / 2

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw