AL HUTCHINSON ENTP., INC., ETC., ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
AMERICAN BANKERS INS. GROUP, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS
AL HUTCHINSON ENTP., INC., ETC., ET AL., PETITIONERS,
AMERICAN BANKERS INS. GROUP, ETC., ET AL., RESPONDENTS
557 So. 2d 880
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1990)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
Following review of this petition for writ of certiorari, it is ordered that as to Respondent Landon, the petition is denied without prejudice to filing a notice of appeal subsequent to entry of final judgment in Landon’s favor. See, e.g., Shupack v. Allstate Ins. Co., 356 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). As to all other respondents, the petition is denied.
HUBBART, BASKIN and COPE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Broyles v. Broyles, 573 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990)…carceration through payment of the ordered amounts. Civil contempt orders must always contain a provision permitting the contemnor to purge himself of his contempt by compliance with the court order he has disobeyed. See, e.g., Contella v. Contella, 557 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Allman v. Johnson, 488 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 5th DCA 1986); Coody v. Muszynski, 402 So. 2d 81 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Moreover, the agreement of the parties incorporated into the 1982 final judgment dissolving the parties’ marriage is…
-
Novak v. Snieda, 659 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995)…contempt order because the court entered it in response to a litigant’s motion for contempt and the order’s purpose was to coerce compliance with a prior order of the court. See Bowen v. Bowen, 471 So. 2d 1274, 1277 (Fla.1985); Contella v. Contella, 557 So. 2d 880, 882-83 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990) (Cowart, J., concurring). The contempt order provided for issuance of a bench warrant without further hearing if Novak failed to appear for a deposition. That provision makes the order fatally flawed. “A trial court may n…
-
Dowis v. State, 578 So. 2d 860 (Fla. 5th DCA 1991)…done. While a particular proceeding may comply with all legal prerequisites for both civil and criminal contempt the two separate concepts should not be mixed as they may result in the confusion found in the instant order. Cf. Contella v. Contella, 557 So. 2d 880 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); see also Carter, 409 So. 2d at 127, and 11 Fla. Jur.2d, Contempt, § 3 (1979). The order in the instant case is vague and indefinite and fails to meet requirements relating to each type of contempt. The appealed order is reverse…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Shupack v. Allstate Ins. Co., 356 So. 2d 1298 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)