Larson-Jackson v. Neal
551 So. 2d 567, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2473, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5810, 1989 WL 120837
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 18, 1989·No. No. 89-1208·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinions
This cause is per curiam affirmed. See § 48.193(l)(h), Fla.Stat. (Supp.1988). This amended version of the statute was in effect at the time of the trial judge’s ruling. Apparently, the parties did not advise the trial judge of this amendment, which renders his decision correct albeit for the wrong reason. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979).
AFFIRMED.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Larson-Jackson v. Neal, 551 So. 2d 567, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2473, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 5810, 1989 WL 120837 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).
551 So. 2d 567 (Larson-Jackson v. Neal) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Oldt v. Sides
573 So. 2d 440 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)