Rosenblatt, Greene & Arnowitz, P.A. v. Flinn
485 So. 2d 484, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6999
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 25, 1986·No. Nos. 85-63, 85-64, 85-233 and 85-248·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
Finding that appellants were not afforded basic due process requirements of notice and opportunity to be heard, we reverse and remand for further proceedings. Quay Development, Inc. v. Elegante Building Corp., 392 So.2d 901 (Fla.1981); Shaw v. Shaw, 455 So.2d 1156 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984).
Reversed and remanded.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Rosenblatt, Greene & Arnowitz, P.A. v. Flinn, 485 So. 2d 484, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6999 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).
485 So. 2d 484 (Rosenblatt, Greene & Arnowitz, P.A. v. Flinn) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hagopian v. Zimmer
653 So. 2d 474 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)