Strano v. Shearson American Express, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Strano v. Shearson American Express, Inc.

499 So. 2d 71, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 137, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11181

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 30, 1986·No. No. 86-2377·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Neither the fact that the brokerage firm participated in, rather than initiated, the extensive discovery for more than one year after the Florida Supreme Court decided Oppenheimer & Co. v. Young, 475 So.2d 221 (Fla.1985), nor the fact that one count of the plaintiffs’ complaint was not subject to arbitration and would have thus supported some limited pretrial discovery, serves to distinguish this case from Puchner v. Drexel Burnham Lambert, Inc., 498 So.2d 550 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), and the belated order compelling arbitration is, accordingly,

Reversed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Neither the fact that the brokerage firm participated in, rather than initiated, the extensive discovery for more than one year after the Florida Supreme Court decided Oppenheimer & Co. v. Young, 475 So.2d 221 (Fla.1985), nor the fact that one count of the plaintiffs’ complaint was not subject to arbitration and would have thus supported some limited pretrial discovery, serves to distinguish this case from Puchner v. Drexel Burnham Lambert, Inc., 498 So.2d 550 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986), and the belated order compelling arbitration is, accordingly,

Reversed.

Strano v. Shearson American Express, Inc., 499 So. 2d 71, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 137, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11181 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

499 So. 2d 71 (Strano v. Shearson American Express, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related