Travelers Indemnity Co. of Illinois v. Hotelerama Associates, Ltd.

732 So. 2d 440, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5662, 1999 WL 270435
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 5, 1999·No. No. 98-2876·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We find no legal or factual basis for the order under review which, in effect, relieved the appellees of the duty to arbitrate the parties’ dispute as they had [441] agreed. Roe v. Amica Mut. Ins. Co., 533 So.2d 279 (Fla.1988); Blackhawk Heating & Plumbing Co. v. Data Lease Fin. Corp., 302 So.2d 404 (Fla.1974); Medident Constr., Inc. v. Chappell, 632 So.2d 194 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994); Montesino v. Advent Technologies, Inc., 676 So.2d 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996), review denied, 684 So.2d 1350 (Fla.1996); Public Health Trust v. M.R. Harrison Constr. Corp., 415 So.2d 756 (Fla 3d DCA 1982), pet. for review denied, 427 So.2d 737 (Fla.1983); Hirschfeld v. Crescent Heights, X, Inc., 707 So.2d 955 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). Hence, the order is reversed with directions to require arbitration.

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

Travelers Indemnity Co. of Illinois v. Hotelerama Associates, Ltd., 732 So. 2d 440, 1999 Fla. App. LEXIS 5662, 1999 WL 270435 (Fla. Ct. App. 1999).

732 So. 2d 440 (Travelers Indemnity Co. of Illinois v. Hotelerama Associates, Ltd.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

MEDIDENT CONSTRUCTION v. Chappell
632 So. 2d 194 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1994)
Roe v. Amica Mut. Ins. Co.
533 So. 2d 279 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1988)
Hirschfeld v. Crescent Heights, X, Inc.
707 So. 2d 955 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Montesino v. Advent Technologies, Inc.
676 So. 2d 32 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Blackhawk Heat. & P. Co., Inc. v. Data Lease Fin. Corp.
302 So. 2d 404 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1974)
Public Health Trust of Dade County v. M.R. Harrison Construction Corp.
415 So. 2d 756 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)