CORSET COVE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ANN ROSEN, APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
This case involves the validity of a non-competition agreement, executed in connection with the sale of a business.
The trial court found that the agreement was unreasonable as to geographical area and as to time. The appellant contends that this was an abuse of discretion.
We have examined the record and fail to find any abuse and therefore affirm. Flammer v. Patton, 245 So. 2d 854 (Fla.1971); Kofoed Public Relations Associates, Inc. v. Mullins, 257 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); Orkin Exterminating Company, Inc. v. Girardeau, 301 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974); Forrest v. Kornblatt, 328 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976).
We have examined the cross-assignment filed by the appellee and find it to be without merit.
Therefore, the final judgment under review be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Dodd, 396 So. 2d 1205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…herefore this opinion as well appear to be contrary to Croteau, which Grubbs cites but does not overrule, and to the appellate decisions which followed Cro-teau prior to Grubbs. Shipp v. State, 349 So. 2d 690 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) and Latham v. State, 360 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Therefore, to permit employment of the supreme court’s discretionary jurisdiction under Fla.R.App.P. 9.030(a)(2)(A)(iv), we “expressly” state that this opinion, while in accord with Grubbs, directly conflicts with the Croteau de…1 / 2
-
Drayton v. State, 710 So. 2d 1018 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998)…l. As we have previously held, the transcript of the hearing on the violations provides “an opportunity for review of the revocation hearing superior to the written statement of evidence and reasons required by Gagnon v. Scarpelli” Latham v. State, 360 So. 2d 127, 128 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (quoting Singletary v. State, 290 So. 2d 116, 121 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)). The transcript of the hearing, the court’s oral findings, and the written order satisfy due process requirements, since they “create a record sufficient…
-
Nicolaas Mathias Huppertz v. State, 399 So. 2d 992 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)…pressly state that this decision is in direct conflict with the earlier supreme court decision in Croteau v. State, 334 So. 2d 577 (Fla.1976), and certify a direct conflict with Shipp v. State, 349 So. 2d 690 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977) and Latham v. State, 360 So. 2d 127 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). Reversed. .Three other violations which were alleged in the affidavit were expressly abandoned by the state at the hearing. Their inclusion in the order of revocation was therefore obviously erroneous. Hence, the findings of v…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Flammer v. Patton, 245 So. 2d 854 (Fla. 1971)
- Orkin Exterminating Co., Inc. v. Girardeau, 301 So. 2d 38 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974)
- Kofoed Pub. Relations Assocs., Inc. v. Mullins, 257 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)
- Forrest v. Kornblatt, 328 So. 2d 528 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)