Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
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)
Judges

J.T.A., INC., ETC., APPELLANT, v. DONALD HARPSTER, ET UX, ET AL., APPELLEES.

ON MOTION FOR REHEARING

PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to the appellant's motion for rehearing, we vacate our per curiam panel decision filed October 20, 1987, and substitute the following opinion therefor.

The issues in this case are controlled by the en banc opinion in Thomas v. Jones, 524 So.2d 693 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). Accordingly, we reverse the final judgment, including the award of attorney's fees to the appellees, and remand without prejudice to the institution of individual actions.

REVERSED; REMANDED.

DAUKSCH, J., and UPCHURCH, J., Retired, concur.

SHARP, C.J., dissents with opinion.

SHARP, Chief Judge, dissenting.

I respectfully dissent for the same reasons expressed in my dissent in Thomas v. Jones, 524 So.2d 693 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988).

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

J.T.A., INC. v. HARPSTER
(Aug 12, 1988)