Case ID: so2d_462/html/1215-01.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

The PROCTER & GAMBLE COMPANY, the Procter & Gamble Paper Products Company, and the Procter & Gamble Distributing Company, Petitioners, v. Barbara POWELL, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Bernadette R. Riley, Deceased, Respondent.
    No. BD-138.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
    Feb. 11, 1985.
    Stephen E. Day, of Taylor, Day, Rio & Mercier, Jacksonville, and Thomas S. Calder, Frank C. Woodside, III, and John E. Jevicky of Dinsmore & Shohl, Cincinnati, Ohio, for petitioners.
    Charles J. Kahn, Jr. of Levin, Warfield, Middlebrooks, Mabie, Thomas, Mayes & Mitchell, Pensacola, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

On petition for writ of common law cer-tiorari, the only issue before us is whether the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by ordering the discovery of documents furnished from outside researchers to Procter & Gamble Company. This issue is controlled by Procter & Gamble v. Swilley, 462 So.2d 1188 (1985), in which this court upheld the trial court’s order permitting respondents to discover such research and related documents.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

ERVIN, C.J., and L. SMITH and NIM-MONS, JJ., concur.