Lunger v. Hinckley
572 So. 2d 1042, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 360, 1991 WL 4324
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided January 23, 1991·No. No. 90-3040·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
We sua sponte strike Betty Lunger as a named respondent.
The respondent concedes error. We grant the petition for writ of mandamus and prohibition and quash the order of the trial court on the authority of Taylor v. Taylor, 569 So.2d 1389 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); Murphy v. Murphy, 558 So.2d 532 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). See Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.490(c).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Lunger v. Hinckley, 572 So. 2d 1042, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 360, 1991 WL 4324 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).
572 So. 2d 1042 (Lunger v. Hinckley) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Swezy v. Bart-Swezy
866 So. 2d 1248 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)