Rose v. North American Van Lines
This text of 794 So. 2d 680 (Rose v. North American Van Lines) 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.
Opinion
The judge of compensation claims dismissed appellant’s petition to set aside a washout settlement, finding that the petition was not legally sufficient to justify an evidentiary hearing. We conclude that the petition made allegations sufficient to at least warrant such a hearing. See Steele v. A.D.H. Bldg. Contractors, Inc., 174 So.2d 16 (Fla.1965); State v. Florida Indus. Comm’n, 151 So.2d 636 (Fla.1963); Gilliland v. Wood ‘N You, 626 So.2d 309 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Smith v. Rose Auto Stores, 596 So.2d 809 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Cordell v. Pittman Bldg. Supply, 470 So.2d 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); D'Amico v. Marina Inn & Yacht Harbor, Inc., 444 So.2d 1038 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Morgan Yacht Corp./Beatrice Foods v. Edwards, 386 So.2d 883 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); East v. Pensacola Tractor & Equip. Co., Inc., 384 So.2d 156 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Accordingly, the order on appeal is REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
794 So. 2d 680, 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 12071, 2001 WL 969255, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rose-v-north-american-van-lines-fladistctapp-2001.