Legal Opinion
Powell v. Southern Bell Telephone & Telegraph Co.
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided April 10, 1984No. 84-125PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
NESBITT, Judge.
By common law certiorari, Powell challenges an order denying his motion claiming entitlement to a trial by jury. We have jurisdiction. Spring v. Ronel Refining, Inc., 421 So.2d 46 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We agree with Powell and quash the order under review.
Southern Bell commenced an action against Powell for declaratory judgment and other relief. Powell procured a court order granting him an extension of time in which to file a counterclaim. His counterclaim was filed on the last day permitted by that order. Two days later, Southern Bell filed an answer to the counterclaim. Two…
2Cases cited5 opinions
- Spring v. Ronel Refining, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
- Barth v. Florida State Constructors Service, Inc.Supreme Court of Florida · 1976
- Warner-Lambert Co. v. PatrickDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
- Boston Rug Galleries, Inc. v. William Iselin & Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1968
- Moretto v. SussmanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1973
3Cited by4 opinions
- Adkins v. WinklerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
- Quality Coffee Servoce, Inc. v. Tallahassee Coca-ColaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
- Wolfe v. SmilackDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012
- STUART B. YANOFSKY, ESQ. v. ANDREW ISAACSDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2019