Richardson v. Aramark/Sedgewick CMS
134 So. 3d 1133, 2014 WL 628032, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 2108
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 18, 2014·No. No. 1D13-4138·Published·Cited by 3 cases
Opinion
Based ' on Castellanos v. Next Door Company, 124 So.3d 392 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013), we AFFIRM. In so doing, we certify that our disposition of the instant case passes upon the same question we certified in Castellanos. Id. at 394. We, therefore, decline to follow the Appellant’s suggestion that we certify additional questions of great public importance relating to the instant case.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Richardson v. Aramark/Sedgewick CMS, 134 So. 3d 1133, 2014 WL 628032, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 2108 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).
134 So. 3d 1133 (Richardson v. Aramark/Sedgewick CMS) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Cynthia Richardson v. Aramark/Sedgwick CMS
193 So. 3d 880 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2016)
Marvin Castellanos v. Next Door Company
192 So. 3d 431 (Supreme Court of Florida, 2016)