Florida Atlantic Associates v. Belmont

464 So. 2d 659, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 575, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12802
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 6, 1985·No. No. 84-2353·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Confident that the trial court is familiar with the premise that, in ruling on a motion under rule 1.280(c), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, in the context of discovery of net worth where an issue of punitive damages is involved, the trial judge may consider, among other things, “whether or not an actual factual basis exists for an award of punitive damages,” Tennant v. Charlton, 377 So.2d 1169 (Fla.1979), we deny the petition for writ of certiorari directed to an order limiting discovery in the lower court.

LETTS, HERSEY and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.

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

Florida Atlantic Associates v. Belmont, 464 So. 2d 659, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 575, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 12802 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

464 So. 2d 659 (Florida Atlantic Associates v. Belmont) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gentry v. State
464 So. 2d 659 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)