Greenstone, Inc. v. D & L, L.L.C.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Greenstone, Inc. v. D & L, L.L.C.

931 So. 2d 221, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 9687, 2006 WL 1627868

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 14, 2006

DocketNo. 1D06-2310

StatusPublished

This text of 931 So. 2d 221 (Greenstone, Inc. v. D & L, L.L.C.) 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.

Bluebook

Greenstone, Inc. v. D & L, L.L.C., 931 So. 2d 221, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 9687, 2006 WL 1627868 (Fla. Ct. App. 2006).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied on the merits. See Micale v. Polen, 487 So.2d 1126 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986) (citing Palmer v. Atkinson, 116 Fla. 366, 156 So. 726 (1934)) (denying a petition for writ of mandamus because the matter could readily be heard before another judge without undue prejudice to the parties even where the reasons set forth in a motion to disqualify a trial judge are inadequate).

KAHN, C.J., ERVIN, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., Concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of mandamus is denied on the merits. See Micale v. Polen, 487 So.2d 1126 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986) (citing Palmer v. Atkinson, 116 Fla. 366, 156 So. 726 (1934)) (denying a petition for writ of mandamus because the matter could readily be heard before another judge without undue prejudice to the parties even where the reasons set forth in a motion to disqualify a trial judge are inadequate).

KAHN, C.J., ERVIN, and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., Concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

931 So. 2d 221, 2006 Fla. App. LEXIS 9687, 2006 WL 1627868, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/greenstone-inc-v-d-l-llc-fladistctapp-2006.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack