Case Name: UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY, a foreign corporation, and Edward Grant as agent and representative of United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Petitioners, v. Lavon WARD, as Circuit Court Judge of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Broward County, Florida, and Robert Morton, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Marie Morton, Respondents
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-03-07
Citations: 578 So. 2d 299
Docket Number: No. 91-361
Parties: UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY, a foreign corporation, and Edward Grant as agent and representative of United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Petitioners, v. Lavon WARD, as Circuit Court Judge of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Broward County, Florida, and Robert Morton, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Marie Morton, Respondents.
Judges: DOWNEY, WARNER and GARRETT, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 578
Pages: 299–300

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES FIDELITY AND GUARANTY COMPANY, a foreign corporation, and Edward Grant as agent and representative of United States Fidelity and Guaranty Company, Petitioners, v. Lavon WARD, as Circuit Court Judge of the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Broward County, Florida, and Robert Morton, individually and as Personal Representative of the Estate of Marie Morton, Respondents.
No. 91-361.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
March 7, 1991.
Certification of Question Denied May 13, 1991.
James W. Dawson of Fazio, Dawson, Di-Salvo, Cannon, Levine, Abers & Podrecca, Fort Lauderdale, for petitioners.
Gary M. Farmer, Fort Lauderdale, for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We grant in part the writ of prohibition on the authority of Southeast Administrators, Inc. v. Moriarty, 571 So.2d 589 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990); and Old Republic Ins. Co. v. Whitworth, 442 So.2d 1078 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983) as to the counts for intentional infliction of emotional distress and "third party beneficiary". However, we deny the writ as it pertains to the count for slander.
DOWNEY, WARNER and GARRETT, JJ., concur.