Woodfield v. Pace

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Woodfield v. Pace

566 So. 2d 949, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7270, 1990 WL 138396

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 26, 1990

DocketNo. 89-3231

StatusPublished

This text of 566 So. 2d 949 (Woodfield v. Pace) 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

Woodfield v. Pace, 566 So. 2d 949, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7270, 1990 WL 138396 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

We affirm on the authority of Guidry v. Sheet Metal Workers Nat’l Pension Fund, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 680, 107 L.Ed.2d 782 (1990). We reject appellants’ arguments based on Kwatcher v. Massachusetts Serv. Emp. Pension Fund, 879 F.2d 957 (1st Cir.1989), because they are raised for the first time on appeal. See Brickell Biscayne Corp. v. Palace Condominium Ass’n, 526 So.2d 982 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).

DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur. GLICKSTEIN, J., concurs specially with opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm on the authority of Guidry v. Sheet Metal Workers Nat’l Pension Fund, — U.S. -, 110 S.Ct. 680, 107 L.Ed.2d 782 (1990). We reject appellants’ arguments based on Kwatcher v. Massachusetts Serv. Emp. Pension Fund, 879 F.2d 957 (1st Cir.1989), because they are raised for the first time on appeal. See Brickell Biscayne Corp. v. Palace Condominium Ass’n, 526 So.2d 982 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988).

DELL and WALDEN, JJ., concur. GLICKSTEIN, J., concurs specially with opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

566 So. 2d 949, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 7270, 1990 WL 138396, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/woodfield-v-pace-fladistctapp-1990.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack