Legal Opinion
David v. Richman
Supreme Court of Florida
Decided October 18, 1990No. 72927PublishedCited by 40 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
We have for review David v. Richman, 528 So.2d 25, 27 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), in which the district court certified the following question as being of great public importance:
Whether a party is precluded from claiming attorney's fees under a contract which has been found to have never existed.
We have jurisdiction, article V, section 3(b)(4), Florida Constitution, and answer the question in the affirmative based on our recent decision in Gibson v. Courtois, 539 So.2d 459 (Fla. 1989).
This dispute over attorney's fees arises in connection with an action brought for the specific performance of a…
Also in this document: Dissent.
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Blackhawk Heat. & P. Co., Inc. v. Data Lease Fin. Corp.Supreme Court of Florida · 1974
- Gibson v. CourtoisSupreme Court of Florida · 1989
- Katz v. Van Der NoordSupreme Court of Florida · 1989
- Leitman v. BooneDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
- David v. RichmanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1988
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by40 opinions
- Solymar Investments, Ltd. v. Banco Santander S.A.Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit · 2012
- LSQ Funding Group, L.C. v. EDS Field ServicesDistrict Court, M.D. Florida · 2012
- King v. BrayDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
- Florida Medical Center, Inc. v. McCoyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1995
- Orthomet, Inc., a Minnesota Corporation v. A.B. Medical, Inc., a Florida Corporation Ray Aubrey, a Florida Citizen Creighton BeddowCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit · 1993
35 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.