Harold Ageloff and Carol M. Ageloff, as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Scott Alan Ageloff, Deceased v. Delta Airlines, Inc.

902 F.2d 822, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8781, 1990 WL 63764
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
DecidedJune 4, 1990
Docket86-6022
StatusPublished

This text of 902 F.2d 822 (Harold Ageloff and Carol M. Ageloff, as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Scott Alan Ageloff, Deceased v. Delta Airlines, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
Harold Ageloff and Carol M. Ageloff, as Personal Representatives of the Estate of Scott Alan Ageloff, Deceased v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 902 F.2d 822, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8781, 1990 WL 63764 (11th Cir. 1990).

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The circumstances of this case are set out in full in Ageloff v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 860 F.2d 379 (11th Cir.1988). The basic questions of Florida law were certified to the Supreme Court of Florida in Ageloff v. Delta Airlines, Inc., 867 F.2d 1268 (11th Cir.1989). The Supreme Court of Florida has answered the certified questions in Delta Air Lines, Inc. v. Ageloff, 552 So.2d 1089 (Fla.1989).

In our opinion published at 860 F.2d 379, we rejected several claims asserted by appellant Delta Airlines, thus affirming the district court in part. We reversed the district court’s allowance of expert witness fees in excess of the statutory amount. Id. at 390. We certified the major questions and deferred ruling on subsidiary evidentia-ry issues. Id. at 389. The Supreme Court of Florida resolved the certified issues in favor of appellees and against Delta Airlines, Inc. 552 So.2d 1089. In light of the decision of the Supreme Court of Florida, the subsidiary evidentiary issues previously deferred are due to be resolved in favor of appellees and against Delta Airlines, Inc.

Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is reversed to the extent that expert witness fees were allowed in excess of the statutory amount, but is affirmed in all other respects.

AFFIRMED IN PART.

REVERSED IN PART.

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

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
902 F.2d 822, 1990 U.S. App. LEXIS 8781, 1990 WL 63764, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harold-ageloff-and-carol-m-ageloff-as-personal-representatives-of-the-ca11-1990.