Jackson v. Pinellas Imaging Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Jackson v. Pinellas Imaging Corp.

661 So. 2d 30, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 12599, 1994 WL 714462

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 28, 1994

DocketNo. 94-01923

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 661 So. 2d 30 (Jackson v. Pinellas Imaging Corp.) 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

Jackson v. Pinellas Imaging Corp., 661 So. 2d 30, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 12599, 1994 WL 714462 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Robert L. Jackson filed a petition for writ of certiorari seeking to quash a nonfinal order of the trial court which denied his motion to compel withdrawal of counsel for defendants. Jackson is entitled to relief and, therefore, we grant the petition. We find no explicit impropriety in the facts before us. However, they illustrate an imputed representation of Jackson’s interests as a guarantor in release-of-lien negotiations between a lending institution and a corporate borrower. Thus, the subsequent defense of the corporation’s principals in a suit brought by Jackson arising out of that earlier relationship and negotiations should be avoided.

The petition is granted, the writ is issued and the order denying Jackson’s motion is quashed with instructions to the trial court to enter an order granting Jackson’s motion.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and BLUE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Robert L. Jackson filed a petition for writ of certiorari seeking to quash a nonfinal order of the trial court which denied his motion to compel withdrawal of counsel for defendants. Jackson is entitled to relief and, therefore, we grant the petition. We find no explicit impropriety in the facts before us. However, they illustrate an imputed representation of Jackson’s interests as a guarantor in release-of-lien negotiations between a lending institution and a corporate borrower. Thus, the subsequent defense of the corporation’s principals in a suit brought by Jackson arising out of that earlier relationship and negotiations should be avoided.

The petition is granted, the writ is issued and the order denying Jackson’s motion is quashed with instructions to the trial court to enter an order granting Jackson’s motion.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and SCHOONOVER and BLUE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

661 So. 2d 30, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 12599, 1994 WL 714462, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/jackson-v-pinellas-imaging-corp-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack