Difilippo ex rel. Difilippo v. Rayle

669 So. 2d 306, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2039, 1996 WL 93908
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 6, 1996·No. No. 95-1492·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The record reflects that the matters raised in the instant lawsuit relate to two other cases that were settled and closed more than one year before the instant action was commenced. In view of the fact that the matters raised by appellants in the instant lawsuit are intrinsic, rather than extrinsic, the trial court was correct in entering its order of dismissal. See Cerniglia v. Cerniglia, 655 So.2d 172 (Fla. 3d DCA), review granted, 662 So.2d 931 (Fla.1995); Langer v. hanger, 463 So.2d 429 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).

Affirmed.

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

Difilippo ex rel. Difilippo v. Rayle, 669 So. 2d 306, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 2039, 1996 WL 93908 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

669 So. 2d 306 (Difilippo ex rel. Difilippo v. Rayle) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Difilippo v. Rayle
684 So. 2d 819 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1996)