Bloom v. Konner
864 So. 2d 585, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 892, 2004 WL 231233
This text of 864 So. 2d 585 (Bloom v. Konner) 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
Bloom v. Konner, 864 So. 2d 585, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 892, 2004 WL 231233 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).
Opinion
Given that the appellant’s noncompliance with the court order regarding the deposit was called to the attention of appellant in ample time to cure the deficiency, and he did not do so, we conclude that the trial court acted within its discretion in enforcing the explicit terms of its earlier order. See Canakaris v. Canakaris, 382 So.2d 1197, 1203 (Fla.1980).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Canakaris v. Canakaris
382 So. 2d 1197 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1980)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
864 So. 2d 585, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 892, 2004 WL 231233, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/bloom-v-konner-fladistctapp-2004.