SIMS CRANE SERVICE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
AM-CAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, AND LEO T. COTE, APPELLEES
SIMS CRANE SERVICE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
AM-CAL CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, A FOREIGN CORPORATION, AND LEO T. COTE, APPELLEES
358 So. 2d 1167
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1978)
Caution
Cited by 7 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Upon considering the briefs, the record and oral argument, we find no reversible error. Accordingly, the order appealed is affirmed.
MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, J., concur. BOOTH, J., dissents.
Dissent
BOOTH, Judge,
dissenting.
The third party complaint in this case, states a cause of action and should not have been dismissed. Florida Gas Company v. Spaulding, 243 So. 2d 129 (Fla.1970); Sunspan Engineering and Construction Company v. Spring-Lock Scaffold Company, 310 So. 2d 4 (Fla.1975); Florida Power Corp. v. Taylor, 332 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1976).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. & Morton Ins. Agency, Inc. v. Meyer, 385 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…tion for summary judgment against Meyer is dismissed. An order denying or granting a motion for summary judgment is not an appealable final order. Donnell v. Industrial Fire & Casualty Company, 378 So. 2d 1344 (Fla.3d DCA 1980); Kessler v. Gumenick, 358 So. 2d 1167 (Fla.3d DCA 1978); Shupack v. Allstate Insurance Company, 356 So. 2d 1298 (Fla.3d DCA 1978). Moreover, since the order granting Morton’s motion for summary judgment did not determine an issue of liability in favor of the party seeking affirmative re…
-
Deal Farms, Inc. v. Farm & Ranch Supply, Inc., 382 So. 2d 888 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)…Shupack v. Allstate Ins. Co., 356 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1978), which was held to be merely authorization for a summary judgment, not a final judgment, nor an order from which interlocutory appeal would properly lie. See also Kessler v. Gumenick, 358 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1978); Rule 9.130, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. We therefore conclude that we have jurisdiction of Deal Farms’ appeal. REVERSED AND REMANDED. McCORD and SHIVERS, JJ„ concur.…
-
Honesto Alegre v. Shurkey, 396 So. 2d 247 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)…ng also a patent, obvious danger, I wrote that “[t]his is a murky area of the law .. .. ” The majority’s affirmance of the order below, and the opinions following Hoffman and Blackburn which persevere in applying no-duty, e. g., Kessler v. Gumenick, 358 So. 2d 1167 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Vermont Mut. Ins. Co. v. Conway, 358 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Ball v. Ates, 369 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), all serve to reinforce my belief.6 Unless, however, no-duty remains alive and well, the above decisions canno…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Sunspan Eng'g & Constr. Co. v. Spring-Lock Scaffolding Co. & Spring-Lock Scaffolding of Fla., Inc., 310 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 1975)
- Fla. Power Corp. v. Taylor, 332 So. 2d 687 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)
- Fla. GAS Co. v. Spaulding, 243 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1970)