DiMase v. Aquamar 176, Inc.
This text of 835 So. 2d 1158 (DiMase v. Aquamar 176, Inc.) 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
Julian DiMASE and Gaetano DiMase, Appellants,
v.
AQUAMAR 176, INC., & Chicago Title Company, Appellees.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Armstrong & Mejer, P.A., and Alvaro L. Mejer, and Timothy J. Armstrong, Coral Gables, for appellants.
Robert P. Frankel & Associates, P.A., and Robert P. Frankel, Miami, for appellees.
Before JORGENSON, COPE, LEVY, GERSTEN, GODERICH, GREEN, FLETCHER, SHEVIN, and RAMIREZ, JJ.
Prior report: 835 So.2d 1150.
*1159 ON MOTION FOR REHEARING EN BANC
PER CURIAM.
The appellants' motion for rehearing en banc is granted and Judge Ramirez's dissenting opinion is adopted as the opinion of the court. The judgment under review is therefore reversed.
COPE, LEVY, GERSTEN, GODERICH, FLETCHER, SHEVIN, and RAMIREZ, JJ., concur.
SCHWARTZ, C.J., is recused.
GREEN, J. (dissenting)
I would deny the motion for rehearing en banc for the reasons expressed in the initial majority opinion of this case.
JORGENSON, J., concurs.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
835 So. 2d 1158, 2003 WL 183378, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dimase-v-aquamar-176-inc-fladistctapp-2003.