Hogan v. ARDC Corp.

637 So. 2d 9, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4170, 1994 WL 163754
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 4, 1994·No. No. 93-0883·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

ON MOTION FOB REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

We deny appellant’s motion for rehearing, but amend our decision of March 9, 1994 to read as follows:

“PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED. Zell v. Cobb, 566 So.2d 806 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990), rev. denied, 577 So.2d 1331 (Fla.1991).”
GLICKSTEIN and FARMER, JJ., and BROWN, LUCY, Associate Judge, concur.

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

Hogan v. ARDC Corp., 637 So. 2d 9, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 4170, 1994 WL 163754 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

637 So. 2d 9 (Hogan v. ARDC Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

ARDC Corp. v. Hogan
656 So. 2d 1371 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Newsome v. Singletary
637 So. 2d 9 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)