Garrett v. Kuehne & Nagel, Inc.
869 So. 2d 1263, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 5222, 2004 WL 784551
Opinion
Affirmed. See and compare Benjamin v. Biel, 831 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002); Barbour v. Brinker Fla., Inc., 801 So.2d 953 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001); Barton Protective Servs., Inc. v. Faber, 745 So.2d 968 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999); Joseph F. Maimone Sec. and Investigations, Inc. v. American Exp. Travel Related Servs., 598 So.2d 272 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992); Allstate Ins. Co. v. Shilling, 374 So.2d 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Garrett v. Kuehne & Nagel, Inc., 869 So. 2d 1263, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 5222, 2004 WL 784551 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).
869 So. 2d 1263 (Garrett v. Kuehne & Nagel, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Allstate Ins. Co. v. Shilling
374 So. 2d 611 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)
Barton Protective Services, Inc. v. Faber
745 So. 2d 968 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Benjamin v. Diel
831 So. 2d 1227 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2002)
Barbour v. Brinker Florida, Inc.
801 So. 2d 953 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Joseph F. Maimone Security & Investigations, Inc. v. American Express Travel Related Services, Inc.
598 So. 2d 272 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)