Dealers Insurance Co. v. Centennial Casualty Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dealers Insurance Co. v. Centennial Casualty Co.

654 So. 2d 676, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5414, 1995 WL 302347

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 19, 1995·No. No. 94-1816·Published

Opinion

THOMPSON, Judge.

AFFIRMED. See Dealers Ins. Co. v. Centennial Casualty Co., 644 So.2d 571 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (holding that bad check insurer, as subrogee of automobile auction operator, was an authorized claimant under statutorily required motor vehicle dealer surety bond), review denied, No. 84,928, — So.2d — (Fla. Apr. 12, 1995); see also Schwab & Co. v. Breezy Bay, Inc., 360 So.2d 117 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) (“The discretion reposed in the trial judge by Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540 is of the broadest scope and in order to reverse a judge’s ruling thereunder, there must be a showing of a gross abuse of discretion.”).

COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

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

THOMPSON, Judge.

AFFIRMED. See Dealers Ins. Co. v. Centennial Casualty Co., 644 So.2d 571 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (holding that bad check insurer, as subrogee of automobile auction operator, was an authorized claimant under statutorily required motor vehicle dealer surety bond), review denied, No. 84,928, — So.2d — (Fla. Apr. 12, 1995); see also Schwab & Co. v. Breezy Bay, Inc., 360 So.2d 117 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978) (“The discretion reposed in the trial judge by Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.540 is of the broadest scope and in order to reverse a judge’s ruling thereunder, there must be a showing of a gross abuse of discretion.”).

COBB and GOSHORN, JJ., concur.

Dealers Insurance Co. v. Centennial Casualty Co., 654 So. 2d 676, 1995 Fla. App. LEXIS 5414, 1995 WL 302347 (Fla. Ct. App. 1995).

Pincite

654 So. 2d 676 (Dealers Insurance Co. v. Centennial Casualty Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related