From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Ulloa v. CMI, Inc.

Supreme Court of Florida.
May 2, 2012
90 So. 3d 274 (Fla. 2012)

Opinion

No. SC11–2291.

2012-05-2

Carlos A. Alejandro ULLOA, et al., Petitioner(s) v. CMI, INC., Respondent(s).


The Court accepts jurisdiction of this case. Oral argument will be set by separate order. Counsel for the parties will be notified of the oral argument date approximately sixty days prior to oral argument.

Petitioner's initial brief on the merits shall be served on or before May 29, 2012; respondent's answer brief on the merits shall be served twenty days after service of petitioner's initial brief on the merits; and petitioner's reply brief on the merits shall be served twenty days after service of respondent's answer brief on the merits. Please file an original and seven copies of all briefs.

Per this Court's Administrative Order In Re: Mandatory Submission of Electronic Copies of Documents, AOSC04–84, dated September 13, 2004, counsel are directed to transmit a copy of all briefs in an electronic format as required by the provisions of that order.

The Clerk of the Fifth District Court of Appeal shall file the original record which shall be properly indexed and paginated on or before July 2, 2012. The record shall include the briefs filed in the district court separately indexed. PARIENTE, QUINCE, POLSTON, and LABARGA, JJ., concur.

LEWIS, J., concurs and would consider without oral argument.


Summaries of

Ulloa v. CMI, Inc.

Supreme Court of Florida.
May 2, 2012
90 So. 3d 274 (Fla. 2012)
Case details for

Ulloa v. CMI, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:Carlos A. Alejandro ULLOA, et al., Petitioner(s) v. CMI, INC.…

Court:Supreme Court of Florida.

Date published: May 2, 2012

Citations

90 So. 3d 274 (Fla. 2012)

Citing Cases

Quest Diagnostics Inc. v. Swaters

Here, even if this Uniform Law for criminal proceedings controlled this civil case, it would be inapplicable…

Quest Diagnostics Inc. v. Swaters

Here, even if this Uniform Law for criminal proceedings controlled this civil case, it would be inapplicable…