Legal Opinion

Stamato v. Stamato

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 12, 2002No. 4D01-3488PublishedCited by 8 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtKlein, J.

This appeal raises the issue of whether an agreement to settle a lawsuit should be rescinded because plaintiff, through a clerical error in the judge’s office, was not aware when she settled that the court had granted her motion to seek punitive damages. We conclude that plaintiff is bound by the agreement.

Appellant plaintiff sued her deceased husband’s daughter by a former marriage for tortious interference and civil theft. She subsequently moved to amend her complaint to seek punitive damages. Two weeks after the hearing on the motion, plaintiffs counsel called the judge’s office and was…

2Cases cited8 opinions

  1. BMW of North America, Inc. v. KrathenDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
  2. Maryland Casualty Company v. KrasnekSupreme Court of Florida · 1965
  3. Dania Jai-Alai Palace, Inc. v. SykesDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1986
  4. Orkin Exterminating Co. v. Palm Beach HotelDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
  5. Croteau v. Operator Service Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Espresso Disposition Corp. 1 v. Santana Sales & Marketing Group, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2013
  2. Suntrust Mortgage v. Dean Calvin Torrenga and Kathleen Ann TorrengaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2014
  3. DePrince v. Starboard Cruise Services, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2015
  4. Garvin v. TidwellDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2012
  5. In Re: Standard Jury Instructions in Contract and Business Cases-2018 Report.Supreme Court of Florida · 2018

3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

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

Powered by the Exa API