De Varona v. De Souza

824 So. 2d 985, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12027, 2002 WL 1906210
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 21, 2002
DocketNo. 3D02-1845
StatusPublished

This text of 824 So. 2d 985 (De Varona v. De Souza) 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
De Varona v. De Souza, 824 So. 2d 985, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12027, 2002 WL 1906210 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We grant the petition for writ of certio-rari in part. As the respondent’s counsel commendably concedes, the trial court erred in denying petitioner’s motion to abate the legal malpractice claim. Perez-Abreu, Zamora & De La Fe, P.A. v. Taracido, 790 So.2d 1051 (Fla.2001). That portion of the order declining to abate count III of respondent’s complaint is hereby quashed and shall be abated o,n remand. This same reasoning, however, does not compel abatement of the fraudulent inducement claim asserted in count IV. The petition is denied as to count IV.

Certiorari granted in part; denied in part and remanded.

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

Related

Perez-Abreu, Zamora & De La Fe, P.A. v. Taracido
790 So. 2d 1051 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
824 So. 2d 985, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 12027, 2002 WL 1906210, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/de-varona-v-de-souza-fladistctapp-2002.