You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.

DEERFIELD FLORIDA HOUSE, INC. and SHERIEF ABU-MOUSTAFA v. COMPUTERS FOR BUSINESS INC. d/b/a CONNECTIONS FOR BUSINESS

Citation: Not availableDocket: 21-3051

Court: District Court of Appeal of Florida; February 14, 2023; Florida; State Appellate Court

Original Court Document: View Document

Narrative Opinion Summary

The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court for Broward County in the case Deerfield Florida House, Inc. and Sherief Abu-Moustafta v. Computers for Business, Inc. d/b/a Connections for Business. The appeal was overseen by Judge Carlos A. Rodriguez, with the case number 16-18756 CACE (14). The appellants were represented by Peter E.S. Wallis of South Florida Business Lawyers, P.A., while the appellee was represented by Steven H. Osber of Conrad Scherer, LLP. The court referenced the precedent set in Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979). The ruling is not final until the resolution of any timely filed motion for rehearing. All judges—Klingensmith, C.J., Warner, and Ciklin, J.J.—concurred with the decision.

Legal Issues Addressed

Affirmation of Lower Court Decision

Application: The District Court of Appeal affirmed the decision made by the Circuit Court for Broward County, indicating that the appellate court found no reversible error in the lower court's ruling.

Reasoning: The District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District, affirmed the decision of the Circuit Court for Broward County in the case Deerfield Florida House, Inc. and Sherief Abu-Moustafta v. Computers for Business, Inc. d/b/a Connections for Business.

Finality of Judgment Pending Rehearing

Application: The decision is not considered final until any motions for rehearing are resolved, providing the parties an opportunity to contest the ruling.

Reasoning: The ruling is not final until the resolution of any timely filed motion for rehearing.

Precedential Guidance in Appellate Review

Application: The appellate court referenced the precedent set in Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee to guide its decision-making process, reflecting reliance on established legal principles.

Reasoning: The court referenced the precedent set in Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979).