Boston v. Antinori & Thury, P.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Boston v. Antinori & Thury, P.A.

500 So. 2d 721, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 219, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6286

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 7, 1987

DocketNo. 86-425

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 500 So. 2d 721 (Boston v. Antinori & Thury, 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

Boston v. Antinori & Thury, P.A., 500 So. 2d 721, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 219, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 6286 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s order granting a new trial on the issue of damages. After careful consideration of the order, the record, the parties’ briefs and their oral arguments, we find no merit in any of the points on appeal other than discussed below.

Both parties agreed in their briefs and in oral argument that if, upon remand, there is an award of future compensation, the computation of supplements must comply with the law as set out in the substituted opinion of Polote v. Meredith, 482 So.2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The trial court did not have the benefit of that opinion as it was substituted subsequent to the trial court’s order granting a new trial. Therefore, the teachings of the Polote case govern as to that point upon retrial.

Affirmed and remanded for a new trial only on the issue of damages.

RYDER, A.C.J., and CAMPBELL and HALL, JJ., concur.

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