Miami-Dade County v. Laureiro

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Miami-Dade County v. Laureiro

894 So. 2d 268, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 17877, 2004 WL 2730776

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 24, 2004

DocketNo. 3D03-3115

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 894 So. 2d 268 (Miami-Dade County v. Laureiro) 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

Miami-Dade County v. Laureiro, 894 So. 2d 268, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 17877, 2004 WL 2730776 (Fla. Ct. App. 2004).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Because the verdict may include amounts for medical bills beyond those actually paid by Medicare, the judgment under review, while otherwise affirmed, is vacated and the cause remanded on the authority of Thyssenkrupp Elevator Co. v. Lasky, 868 So.2d 547 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), review dismissed, 873 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 2004) and Cooperative Leasing, Inc. v. Johnson, 872 So.2d 956 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review granted, 884 So.2d 22 (Fla. Case no. SC04-1021, September 10, 2004)(table). As stated in Thyssenkrupp, 868 So.2d at 550,

[o]n remand the trial court is authorized to receive such evidence as may be necessary to fix the precise amount of the reduction [if any] required by our decision today.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part.

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

PER CURIAM.

Because the verdict may include amounts for medical bills beyond those actually paid by Medicare, the judgment under review, while otherwise affirmed, is vacated and the cause remanded on the authority of Thyssenkrupp Elevator Co. v. Lasky, 868 So.2d 547 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003), review dismissed, 873 So.2d 1225 (Fla. 2004) and Cooperative Leasing, Inc. v. Johnson, 872 So.2d 956 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004), review granted, 884 So.2d 22 (Fla. Case no. SC04-1021, September 10, 2004)(table). As stated in Thyssenkrupp, 868 So.2d at 550,

[o]n remand the trial court is authorized to receive such evidence as may be necessary to fix the precise amount of the reduction [if any] required by our decision today.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

894 So. 2d 268, 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 17877, 2004 WL 2730776, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/miami-dade-county-v-laureiro-fladistctapp-2004.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack