Thenet v. Jenne

968 So. 2d 46, 2007 WL 2480993
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedSeptember 5, 2007
Docket4D06-4916
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 968 So. 2d 46 (Thenet v. Jenne) 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
Thenet v. Jenne, 968 So. 2d 46, 2007 WL 2480993 (Fla. Ct. App. 2007).

Opinion

968 So.2d 46 (2007)

Thierry Albert THENET, Appellant,
v.
Ken JENNE, Sheriff of Broward County, and Broward Sheriff's Office, Appellees.

No. 4D06-4916.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

September 5, 2007.
Rehearing Denied December 6, 2007.

Robert C. Gindel, Jr. of Robert C. Gindel, Jr., P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Carmen Rodriguez of Law Offices of Carmen Rodriguez, P.A., Miami, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

After the sheriff terminated Thierry Thenet, a career deputy with the Broward Sheriff's Office, Thenet filed a request for an arbitration panel under the applicable collective bargaining agreement. Later, Thenet filed suit in the circuit court to compel arbitration. The circuit court granted the sheriff's motion to dismiss, holding that Thenet's request was untimely.

We reverse because the issue of timeliness was a question for an arbitrator. See Alderman v. City of Jacksonville, Fire & Rescue Div., 902 So.2d 885, 887 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) ("[Q]uestions of timeliness are to be decided by an arbitrator, not a trial court. This is true even if the time requirement for arbitration is labeled a condition *47 precedent"); Pembroke Indus. Park P'ship v. Jazayri Constr., Inc., 682 So.2d 226, 227 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) ("[T]he issue of whether the demand for arbitration was timely is a question of fact for the arbitrator to decide, not the trial court."); CED Constr., Inc. v. Kaiser-Taulbee Assocs., 816 So.2d 813 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002) ("The issue of whether the demand for arbitration was timely is a question of fact to be decided by arbitration, not the trial court."); see also O'Keefe Architects, Inc. v. CED Constr. Partners, Ltd., 944 So.2d 181, 188 (Fla.2006) (holding that a statute of limitations defense was to be decided by the arbitrator).

STONE, POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

John Cox v. Village of Tequesta
185 So. 3d 601 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2016)
Gren v. Gren
133 So. 3d 1066 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2014)
Premier Real Estate Holdings, LLC v. Butch
24 So. 3d 708 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2009)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
968 So. 2d 46, 2007 WL 2480993, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thenet-v-jenne-fladistctapp-2007.