Connecticut General Life Insurance Co. v. Dyess
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
PETERSON, Judge.
Petitioners, two health insurance carriers, Connecticut General Life Insurance Company and Golden Rule Insurance Company, seek certiorari review of the trial court’s order allowing the plaintiffs below, Willie E. Dyess and Margaret T. Dyess (Dyess), to amend their complaint after a mandate was issued in a previous appeal. We consolidated the two petitions for purposes of reviewing the common issues. The petitioner insurance carriers allege that the prior appeal established the law of the case and precludes the amendment. We agree and grant the petition.
In our decision in…
2Cases cited7 opinions
- Dober v. WorrellSupreme Court of Florida · 1981
- Coudry v. City of TitusvilleDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
- FLORIDA AIR CONDITIONERS v. Colonial SupplyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- CONNECTICUT GEN. LIFE INS. v. DyessDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
- Don Suntan Corporation v. TANNING RESEARCH LAB., INC.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Keller Industries v. VolkDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
- Francois v. University of MiamiDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2016