SAMUEL SLOBAN AND BETTY SLOBAN, APPELLANTS,
v.
MCKESSON & ROBBINS DRUG COMPANY, A DIVISION OF FOREMOST-MCKESSON, INC., A CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1982-06-09
No. 81-713
ANSTEAD, BERANEK and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
415 So. 2d 90 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1982) Negative Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Reversed on the authority of Robert B. Ehmann, Inc. v. Bergh, 363 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), and remanded to give appellants an opportunity to file written defenses to the allegations of the order to show cause. On remand all parties may present additional evidence and the appellee shall also be entitled to rely upon the previously presented evidence.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

ANSTEAD, BERANEK and HURLEY, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Sverdahl v. Farmers & Merchs. Sav. Bank, 582 So. 2d 738 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)
    …risdictional grounds, citing Machado v. Foreign Trade, Inc., 544 So. 2d 1061 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Appellants respond with our decisions in Coloso Boat Corp. v. Souza, 492 So. 2d 1100 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986), and Sloban v. McKesson & Robbins Drug Company, 415 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982), arguing that these decisions allowed appeals of identical orders. To be sure, neither Coloso nor Sloban raises or considers whether the orders are properly appealable. In Coloso, we held that the trial court should first have e…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw