Colasante v. Nash

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Colasante v. Nash

670 So. 2d 1078, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2822

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 20, 1996

DocketNo. 95-2757/3473

StatusPublished

This text of 670 So. 2d 1078 (Colasante v. Nash) 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

Colasante v. Nash, 670 So. 2d 1078, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2822 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The parties raise numerous issues on appeal and cross appeal. We find that the trial court did an excellent job in handling a difficult and complicated case. We find only one error: The trial court failed to award prejudgment interest as to the birth expenses which were awarded. Mason v. Reiter, 564 So.2d 142 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). We, therefore, remand for the award of prejudgment interest. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.

JOANOS, WOLF and BENTON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The parties raise numerous issues on appeal and cross appeal. We find that the trial court did an excellent job in handling a difficult and complicated case. We find only one error: The trial court failed to award prejudgment interest as to the birth expenses which were awarded. Mason v. Reiter, 564 So.2d 142 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990). We, therefore, remand for the award of prejudgment interest. In all other respects, the judgment is affirmed.

JOANOS, WOLF and BENTON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

670 So. 2d 1078, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2822, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/colasante-v-nash-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack