Eyster v. Chapnick

530 So. 2d 1110, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2178, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4139, 1988 WL 96088
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 21, 1988·No. No. 88-1324·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Service of process upon Eyster was void because of noncompliance with section 48.-031(1), Florida Statutes (1985). We therefore reverse on authority of Willoughby v. Seese Realty, Inc., 421 So.2d 691 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Herskowitz v. Schwarz & Schiffrin, 411 So.2d 1359 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982); Cullimore v. Barnett Bank of Jacksonville, 386 So.2d 894 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); see also Carlini v. State Dept. of Legal Affairs, 521 So.2d 254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988).

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

LETTS, WALDEN and STONE, JJ., concur.

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

Eyster v. Chapnick, 530 So. 2d 1110, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2178, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 4139, 1988 WL 96088 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

530 So. 2d 1110 (Eyster v. Chapnick) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Cullimore v. Barnett Bank of Jacksonville
386 So. 2d 894 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)
Herskowitz v. Schwarz & Schiffrin
411 So. 2d 1359 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)
Carlini v. STATE, DEPT. OF LEGAL AFFAIRS
521 So. 2d 254 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Willoughby v. Seese Realty Inc.
421 So. 2d 691 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)