Degrasse v. Wertheim
This text of 566 So. 2d 515 (Degrasse v. Wertheim) 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.
Opinion
James DEGRASSE, Petitioner,
v.
Herbert WERTHEIM, et al., Respondents.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Following review of this petition for writ of certiorari, together with the response and the reply thereto, it is ordered that said petition is hereby denied.
JORGENSON and COPE, JJ., concur.
BASKIN, J., would deny without prejudice to consideration on plenary appeal. Petitioner's motion for attorney's fees is denied.
ON MOTION FOR CLARIFICATION
We grant the motion for clarification. It is well settled that a denial of certiorari without a written opinion cannot be construed as passing on the merits of the dispute. Florida Insurance Guaranty Ass'n. v. Celotex Corp., 547 So.2d 696, 697 (Fla. 4th DCA 1989). The concurrence in the order dated February 15, 1990 does no more than make explicit what is implicit in the panel's ruling.
BASKIN, JORGENSON and COPE, JJ., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
566 So. 2d 515, 1990 WL 94925, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/degrasse-v-wertheim-fladistctapp-1990.