Alex Hofrichter, P.A. v. Donald S. Zuckerman, P.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Alex Hofrichter, P.A. v. Donald S. Zuckerman, P.A.

623 So. 2d 829, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 9093, 1993 WL 337149

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 7, 1993

DocketNo. 92-2075

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 623 So. 2d 829 (Alex Hofrichter, P.A. v. Donald S. Zuckerman, P.A.) 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.

Bluebook

Alex Hofrichter, P.A. v. Donald S. Zuckerman, P.A., 623 So. 2d 829, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 9093, 1993 WL 337149 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the post-judgment order denying discovery in aid of execution based on the appellee Donald S. Zuckerman’s invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination, without prejudice to the appellants [Alex Hofrichter, P.A. and Aex Hofri-chter, individually] to raise in the trial court on remand an issue which was expressly reserved by the trial court for future determination, namely, whether the appellee Donald S. Zuckerman has, by his conduct, waived his right to assert his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in this proceeding. See, e.g., United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1356 (11th Cir.1991); Rainerman v. Eagle Nat'l Bank of Miami, 541 So.2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the post-judgment order denying discovery in aid of execution based on the appellee Donald S. Zuckerman’s invocation of his Fifth Amendment privilege against self incrimination, without prejudice to the appellants [Alex Hofrichter, P.A. and Aex Hofri-chter, individually] to raise in the trial court on remand an issue which was expressly reserved by the trial court for future determination, namely, whether the appellee Donald S. Zuckerman has, by his conduct, waived his right to assert his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination in this proceeding. See, e.g., United States v. Argomaniz, 925 F.2d 1349, 1356 (11th Cir.1991); Rainerman v. Eagle Nat'l Bank of Miami, 541 So.2d 740 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989).

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

623 So. 2d 829, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 9093, 1993 WL 337149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alex-hofrichter-pa-v-donald-s-zuckerman-pa-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack