Legal Opinion
Amato v. Intindola
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided September 10, 2003No. 4D02-3366PublishedCited by 11 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
854 So.2d 812 (2003)
Sal AMATO and Clara Amato, his wife, Appellants,
v.
Randolph J. INTINDOLA and City of Hallandale, Appellees.
No. 4D02-3366.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
September 10, 2003.
Rehearing Denied October 10, 2003.
Paul J. Kneski, Miami, for appellants.
Mark Goldstein, City Attorney, Hallandale Beach, for appellees.
WARNER, J.
In this personal injury action, the trial court dismissed appellant's complaint after concluding that he perpetrated a fraud on the court. The trial court's dismissal was based on a videotape taken by an investigator which depicted appellant…
2Cases cited10 opinions
- Salim Aoude v. Mobil Oil CorporationCourt of Appeals for the First Circuit · 1989
- Hervey v. AlfonsoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
- Morgan v. CampbellDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2002
- Jacob v. HendersonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
- Kornblum v. SchneiderDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1992
5 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Ramey v. Haverty Furniture Companies, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008
- Ruiz v. City of OrlandoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
- Bologna v. SchlangerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2008
- Bob Montgomery Real Estate v. DjokicDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2003
- Gehrmann v. City of OrlandoDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.