Case ID: so2d_453/html/1148-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Richard H. PARNES and Sandra S. Parnes, Appellants, v. Jeffrey WILLNER, Sherill Willner, the Keyes Company and the Klock Company, Appellees.
    No. 84-338.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    July 10, 1984.
    Rehearing Denied Aug. 30, 1984.
    Albert J. Zemlock, Miami, for appellants.
    Daniel Mones and Frank M. Marks, Miami, for appellees.
    Before NESBITT, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The appellants have conceded that there is no record of their having challenged below the authority of their attorney to enter into the settlement agreement, and this challenge, having been made for the first time in their reply brief, is not preserved for review. The record does reflect that the only challenge made below to the agreement, and indeed the only challenge made in their initial brief, was that the written communication sent by appellants’ attorney did not constitute an offer of settlement which was capable of being accepted. The trial court correctly ruled that the latter challenge was without merit.

Affirmed.