AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)

LAWYERS TITLE INSURANCE CORPORATION, A VIRGINIA CORPORATION, APPELLANT, v. MARIE RUTH REITZES AND YOUNG, STERN TANNENBAUM, P.A., APPELLEES.

ON RESPONSE TO ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE

POLEN, Judge.

We note appellant's response, filed December 6, 1993, to the order to show cause why sanctions should not be imposed, as contained in our November 17, 1993, opinion denying appellant's motion for rehearing. Appellant's response does not satisfy this court's inquiry. Appellant persists in maintaining that its motion for rehearing was proper and not in derogation of the proscriptions against Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330(a) motions rearguing the merits. We clearly rejected such a notion in our November 17, 1993, opinion.

Accordingly, as a sanction for this flagrant violation of Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.330(a), we impose a fine in the amount of $1250, to be paid within 30 days of this opinion. We further direct that this fine be paid one-half by Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, and one-half by appellant's counsel, McDermott, Will Emery.

GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

LAWYERS TITLE INS. CORP. v. REITZES
(Jan 12, 1994)