Mercury Cas. Co. v. Flores
870 So. 2d 127, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 19198, 2003 WL 22956421
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 17, 2003·No. 3D03-453·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
MERCURY CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellant,
v.
Clara FLORES, Appellee.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
*128 Cooney, Mattson, Lance, Blackburn, Richards & O'Connor and Warren B. Kwavnick, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.
Lopez & Best and Virginia M. Best, Miami, for appellee.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., LEVY and SHEVIN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
We affirm the judgment finding that the alleged error, if any, in the admission of the evidence was entirely harmless. See Soler v. Kukula, 297 So.2d 600, 602 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); Hall v. Haldane, 268 So.2d 403, 404-05 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Mercury Cas. Co. v. Flores, 870 So. 2d 127, 2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 19198, 2003 WL 22956421 (Fla. Ct. App. 2003).
870 So. 2d 127 (Mercury Cas. Co. v. Flores) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Mercury Cas. Co. v. Flores
905 So. 2d 179 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2005)
Burgess Transportation, Inc. v. Arostegui
882 So. 2d 411 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)