Home/District Court of Appeal of Florida/Ring Power Corp. v. Condado-Perez

Ring Power Corp. v. Condado-Perez

224 So. 3d 885, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 11835, 2017 WL 3560572
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedAugust 18, 2017
DocketCase No. 2D16-3769
StatusPublished

This text of 224 So. 3d 885 (Ring Power Corp. v. Condado-Perez) 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
Ring Power Corp. v. Condado-Perez, 224 So. 3d 885, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 11835, 2017 WL 3560572 (Fla. Ct. App. 2017).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In light of the reversal of the underlying judgment on which the attorney’s fee order in this appeal is based, Ring Power Corp. v. Condado-Perez, 219 So.3d 1028, 1030 (Fla. 2d DCA 2017), we reverse the order on attorney’s fees. See ARC Foods, Inc. v. MGI Props., 746 So.2d 514, 514 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999); Siegel v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank, 100 So.3d 783, 784 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012); S & I Invs. v. Payless Flea Mkt., Inc., 40 So.3d 48, 49 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010).

Reversed.

KHOUZAM, SALARIO, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.

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

Related

S & I INVESTMENTS v. Payless Flea Market, Inc.
40 So. 3d 48 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2010)
Ring Power Corporation v. Condado-Perez
219 So. 3d 1028 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2017)
Siegel v. J.P. Morgan Chase Bank
100 So. 3d 783 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2012)
ARC Foods, Inc. v. MGI Properties
746 So. 2d 514 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
224 So. 3d 885, 2017 Fla. App. LEXIS 11835, 2017 WL 3560572, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ring-power-corp-v-condado-perez-fladistctapp-2017.