Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. D & A Accounting & Consulting Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. D & A Accounting & Consulting Corp.

698 So. 2d 935, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 10268, 1997 WL 559440

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 10, 1997

DocketNo. 97-1217

StatusPublished

This text of 698 So. 2d 935 (Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. D & A Accounting & Consulting Corp.) 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

Dean Witter Reynolds, Inc. v. D & A Accounting & Consulting Corp., 698 So. 2d 935, 1997 Fla. App. LEXIS 10268, 1997 WL 559440 (Fla. Ct. App. 1997).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We treat the petition for certiorari as a notice of appeal from a final order in a bill of discovery.

It was incumbent upon the trial court to determine if the trade secret privilege exists, and whether the questions asked and objected to even invaded that privilege. See Uniroyal Goodrich Tire Co. v. Eddings, 673 So.2d 131 (Fla. 4th DCA 1996).

It was not necessary for appellant to sue for damages prior to assertion of the bill for discovery. See Adventist Health Sys. Sunbelt, Inc. v. Hegwood, 569 So.2d 1295 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990).

Accordingly, we reverse and remand with direction to proceed in accordance herewith.

GLICKSTEIN, KLEIN and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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