Hazelwood v. Bautista
683 So. 2d 1164, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 13241, 1996 WL 724195
Opinion
We reverse in part and remand for the trial court to enter an amended order limiting Appellant’s obligation for future medical and dental expenses by inserting appropriate words of limitation. E.g., Armstrong v. Armstrong, 623 So.2d 1216, 1219 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). In all other respects, the final judgment is affirmed. Canakaris v. Cana-karis, 382 So.2d 1197 (Fla.1980); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Hazelwood v. Bautista, 683 So. 2d 1164, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 13241, 1996 WL 724195 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).
683 So. 2d 1164 (Hazelwood v. Bautista) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee
377 So. 2d 1150 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1979)
Armstrong v. Armstrong
623 So. 2d 1216 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1993)
Canakaris v. Canakaris
382 So. 2d 1197 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1980)