Legal Opinion

Forster v. Durham

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided September 13, 1990No. 75529PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

We accepted review of Durham v. Palm Court, Inc., 558 So.2d 59 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), based on express and direct conflict with First Florida Bank, N.A. v. Max Mitchell & Co., 541 So.2d 155 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), quashed, 558 So.2d 9 (Fla.1990), and Gordon v. Etue, Wardlaw & Co., 511 So.2d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), disapproved, First Florida Bank, 558 So.2d at 16. We now find that the basis of conflict jurisdiction has been eliminated by our opinion in First Florida Bank. Moreover, we find the result reached by the district court below to be consistent with the analysis in First Florida Bank.…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. First Fla. Bank, NA v. Max Mitchell & Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1990
  2. Gordon v. ETUE, WARDLAW & CO., PADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
  3. Durham v. Palm Court, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  4. First Florida Bank v. MAX MITCHELL & CO., PADistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. OCEAN RITZ v. GGV Associates, Ltd.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API