Advance Co. v. Albert
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
PEARSON, Judge.
The appellant in its amended complaint sued defendant-appellee Mike Albert upon one theory of liability and defendant-appel-lee Harbor Island Spa upon a different theory of liability. Subsequently, the defendants-appellees cross-claimed against each other. After trial of the cause the jury returned two verdicts, one in favor of the defendants-appellees and against the plaintiff-appellant on the plaintiff-appellant’s claim,1 the other in favor of Harbor Island Spa and against Mike Albert on the cross-claims. The damages in the verdict on the cross-claims were assessed at “none…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Louisville & Nashville Railroad Company v. FlournoyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1961
- Plaks v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1965
- Dicosola v. Heitel ex rel. HeitelDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1962
3Cited by5 opinions
- Phillips v. OstrerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1985
- Skidmore, Owings & Merrill v. VOLPE CONST., CO.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
- Brod v. AdlerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
- Schiffman v. Powell System, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1971
- Whatley v. SacharovDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989