Zeccola v. Ezzo

370 So. 2d 38, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14883
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 10, 1979
DocketNo. 78-957
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 370 So. 2d 38 (Zeccola v. Ezzo) 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
Zeccola v. Ezzo, 370 So. 2d 38, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14883 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant conclusively established, without genuine issue of material fact, that the plaintiff was on actual notice of the basis of his claim for legal malpractice more than two years before the present action was filed. The summary judgment entered below for the defendant because of the bar of the statute of limitations, Section 95.-ll(4)(a), Florida Statutes (1975), is therefore affirmed. See Robinson v. Sparer, 365 So.2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Steiner v. Ciba-Geigy Corp., 364 So.2d 47 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); compare Green v. Bartel, 365 So.2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978); Rosen v. Sparber, 369 So.2d 960 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978).

Affirmed.

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

Related

Pomerance v. Gragg
517 So. 2d 116 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
370 So. 2d 38, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14883, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/zeccola-v-ezzo-fladistctapp-1979.