Abco. Enterprises, Inc. v. Uro-Tile, Inc.
This text of 524 So. 2d 739 (Abco. Enterprises, Inc. v. Uro-Tile, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Upon a review of the record, it is clear that the appellants were independent contractors. See, e.g., Wilson v. Sandstrom, 317 So.2d 732 (Fla.1975), cert. denied sub nom. Alder v. Sandstrom, 423 U.S. 1053, 96 S.Ct. 782, 46 L.Ed.2d 642 (1976); Cantor v. Cochran, 184 So.2d 173 (Fla.1966); Pearson v. Harris, 449 So.2d 339 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Therefore, Chapter 448, Florida Statutes, is not applicable. Accordingly, the award of attorney’s fees to appel-lees is reversed. The award of costs is affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
524 So. 2d 739, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 1195, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1998, 1988 WL 47515, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/abco-enterprises-inc-v-uro-tile-inc-fladistctapp-1988.