APPLICATION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FOR THE PRODUCTION OF SYLVIA BERGER
APPLICATION OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK FOR THE PRODUCTION OF SYLVIA BERGER
362 So. 2d 447
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1978)
Negative Treatment
Cited by 10 cases
Opinion of the Court
LETTS, Judge.
This cause is affirmed.
Pursuant to the authority of McGrath v. People of the State of New York, 258 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972), we remand to the Circuit Court for the entry of an order, amending the one appealed from, designating an appropriate future date and period of days, for the required appearance of the witness at the New York proceedings.
AFFIRMED AND REMANDED IN ACCORDANCE HEREWITH.
CROSS and MOORE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Skidmore v. The Volpe Constr. Co., Inc., 511 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…to the action previously litigated. Trucking Employees of N. Jersey Welfare Fund, Inc. v. Romano, 450 So. 2d 843 (Fla.1984); Freehling v. MGIC Fin. Corp., 437 So. 2d 191, 193 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Coplan Pipe & Supply Co. v. Central Bank & Trust Co., 362 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). As the party claiming the benefit of collateral estoppel, Volpe had to demonstrate identity of the issues and of the parties or their privies. Krug v. Meros, 468 So. 2d 299, 302 (Fla. 2d DCA), review denied, 480 So. 2d 1295 (Fla.…
-
Fed. Deposit Ins. Corp. for Sunrise Sav. & Loan Ass'n v. Hemmerle, 592 So. 2d 1110 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…ne. Wise v. Tucker, 399 So. 2d 500, 502-503 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981) (citing Masciarelli v. Maco Supply Corp., 224 So. 2d 329 (Fla.1969); Avant v. Hammond Jones, Inc., 79 So. 2d 423 (Fla.1955); and Copian Pipe and Supply Co. v. Central Bank & Trust Co., 362 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)). The foreclosure action and Second Guaranty action both dealt with the issue of whether evidence of the oral agreement to extend the loan payment deadline could be admitted at trial. Estoppel by judgment applies “whether the caus…
-
Virgil v. Wise, 399 So. 2d 500 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)…el by judgment will prevent a defendant from maintaining the later one. Masciarelli v. Maco Supply Corp., 224 So. 2d 329 (Fla.1969); Avant v. Hammond Jones, Inc., 79 So. 2d 423 (Fla.1955); Coplan Pipe & [*503] Supply Co. v. Central Bank & Trust Co., 362 So. 2d 447 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). Since this contract action, like the prior foreclosure suit, is ultimately concerned with whether Tucker defaulted on the mortgage, estoppel by judgment precludes relitigation through maintenance of this contract action. Tuz v. E…
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
- State Farm Fire & Cas. Co. v. Ausley, 258 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1972)
- McGRATH v. People of the State OF NEW York, 258 So. 2d 291 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)