Treto v. Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc.

483 So. 2d 781, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6542
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 11, 1986
DocketNo. 85-1452
StatusPublished

This text of 483 So. 2d 781 (Treto v. Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc.) 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
Treto v. Post, Buckley, Schuh & Jernigan, Inc., 483 So. 2d 781, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6542 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Finding that Count IX of the Third Amended Complaint states a cause of action, we reverse the order dismissing Count IX of the Third Amended Complaint with prejudice. Conklin v. Cohen, 287 So.2d 56 (Fla.1973); Pizzi v. Central Bank & Trust Co., 250 So.2d 895 (Fla.1971); Copeland v. Celotex Corp., 447 So.2d 908 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), modified on other grounds, 471 So.2d 533 (Fla.1985).

Reversed.

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

Related

Pizzi v. Central Bank and Trust Company
250 So. 2d 895 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1971)
Conklin v. Cohen
287 So. 2d 56 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1973)
Copeland v. Celotex Corp.
447 So. 2d 908 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1984)
Celotex Corp. v. Copeland
471 So. 2d 533 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1985)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
483 So. 2d 781, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6542, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/treto-v-post-buckley-schuh-jernigan-inc-fladistctapp-1986.