Dattoma v. Turiano

536 So. 2d 1037, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1633, 1988 WL 36842
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided April 27, 1988·No. Nos. 4-86-1705, 4-86-1706·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We sua sponte consolidate these two appeals and affirm. We believe the trial court did have jurisdiction to adjudicate these claims. See Northeast Bank of Clearwater v. Bentley, 413 So.2d 480 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982). We also reject the other claims of error asserted by appellants and find competent substantial evidence in the record to support all of the rulings of the trial court.

ANSTEAD, GLICKSTEIN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.'

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

Dattoma v. Turiano, 536 So. 2d 1037, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 1633, 1988 WL 36842 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

536 So. 2d 1037 (Dattoma v. Turiano) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State v. Louis
571 So. 2d 1358 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
State v. LaSalla
536 So. 2d 1037 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)