Martin v. Modern Door & Hardware

630 So. 2d 604, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 13050, 1993 WL 499247
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 7, 1993·No. No. 93-2587·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The Judge of Compensation Claims has certified that the tape recording of the final hearing is inaudible and therefore, a record cannot be reconstructed. Remand for a new hearing has been requested and no party has filed an objection. Accordingly, the final order is reversed and the cause is remanded [605] for a new hearing. Arnold Lumber Co. v. Harris, 469 So.2d 786 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

ZEHMER, C.J., and BOOTH and JOANOS, JJ., concur.

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

Martin v. Modern Door & Hardware, 630 So. 2d 604, 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 13050, 1993 WL 499247 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

630 So. 2d 604 (Martin v. Modern Door & Hardware) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Arnold Lumber Company v. Harris
469 So. 2d 786 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)