Case ID: so3d_133/html/0930-01.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

R.J. REYNOLDS TOBACCO COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Melba SHERMAN, etc., Respondent.
    No. SC12-437.
    Supreme Court of Florida.
    Feb. 27, 2014.
    Gordon James III and Eric L. Lundt of Sedgwick LLP, Fort Lauderdale, FL; Gregory G. Katsas and Charles R.A. Morse of Jones Day, Washington, DC, for Petitioner.
    Robert S. Glazier of Law Office of Robert S. Glazier, Miami, Florida; Adam Trop of Trop <& Ameen, P.A., Hollywood, FL; Gary M. Paige of Law Office of Gary M. Paige, Coral Gables, FL; and Alex Alvarez of The Alvarez Law Firm, Coral Gables, FL, for Respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

We initially accepted review of the decision in R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Sherman, 79 So.3d 887 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012), a per curiam affirmance citing to R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Brown, 70 So.3d 707 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011), because we accepted jurisdiction in Brown based on express and direct conflict. We have since discharged jurisdiction in Brown. Therefore, there is no basis to exercise jurisdiction in this case. Accordingly, we hereby discharge jurisdiction and dismiss review.

No motion for rehearing will be entertained by the Court. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.330(d)(2).

POLSTON, C.J., and PARIENTE, LEWIS, QUINCE, CANADY, LABARGA, and PERRY, JJ., concur.