Crawford v. City National Bank

Florida District Courts of Appeal August 13, 2003

Crawford v. City National Bank, 851 So. 2d 897 (2003)

2003 Fla. App. LEXIS 12333; 2003 WL 21919281

Fletcher, Levy, Schwartz

Opinion of the Court

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See § 222.11(l)(c), Florida Statutes (2002); Mazzella v. Boinis, 617 So.2d 1156 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), review dismissed, 626 So.2d 203 (Fla. 1993); In re Barncastle, 8 B.R. 464 (Bankr.S.D.Fla. 1981).

LEVY and FLETCHER, JJ., concur.

Concurring Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Chief Judge

(specially concurring).

I entirely agree with affirmance, notwithstanding that my failure to adhere to the rule that cases should be decided on the basis they were litigated below and argued on appeal led to the vehement expression of views at oral argument which, it was soon revealed, were contrary to the law of Florida. No harm done except to my (heretofore monumental) legal ego.

Reference

Full Case Name: Freddie L. CRAWFORD v. CITY NATIONAL BANK and Westport Recovery Corporation
Cited By: 1 case
Status: Published