Soffer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.
This text of 106 So. 3d 465 (Soffer v. R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co.) 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
ON APPELLANT/CROSS-APPEL-LEE’S MOTION FOR REHEARING OR REHEARING EN BANC AND APPELLEE/CROSS-APPEL-LANT’S MOTION FOR CERTIFICATION OR REHEARING
In our original opinion, we affirmed the cross-appeal without comment. We grant rehearing to clarify that we affirm R.J. Reynolds’s third issue on appeal — namely, whether the trial court’s application of factual findings established in Engle violated R.J. Reynolds’s due process rights — on the authority of R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Martin, 53 So.3d 1060 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010), review denied, 67 So.3d 1050 (2011), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 132 S.Ct. 1794, 182 L.Ed.2d 617 (2012), and Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Douglas, 83 So.3d 1002 (Fla. 2d DCA 2012), review granted, No. SC12-617 (2012). We otherwise deny rehearing, rehearing en banc, and certification.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
106 So. 3d 465, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 66, 2013 WL 11873, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/soffer-v-rj-reynolds-tobacco-co-fladistctapp-2013.