Case Name: William U. FINCH and Shambaugh & Finch, P.A., Appellants, v. Eric RIDER, Alan Weinstein, Mark Krasnow, et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1982-11-10
Citations: 421 So. 2d 767
Docket Number: No. 82-33
Parties: William U. FINCH and Shambaugh & Finch, P.A., Appellants, v. Eric RIDER, Alan Weinstein, Mark Krasnow, et al., Appellees.
Judges: LETTS, C.J., and DOWNEY and DELL, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 421
Pages: 767–768

Head Matter:
William U. FINCH and Shambaugh & Finch, P.A., Appellants, v. Eric RIDER, Alan Weinstein, Mark Krasnow, et al., Appellees.
No. 82-33.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Nov. 10, 1982.
Karel Baarslag of the Law Office of James Henderson, West Palm Beach, for appellants Finch and Shambaugh & Finch, P.A.
H. Jack Klingensmith of Broad & Cassell, Bay Harbor Islands, for appellee Mark Krasnow.
Gerald E. Rosser, Miami, for Appellee Alan E. Weinstein.
Montgomery, Lytal, Reiter, Denney & Se-arcy, P.A., and Edna L. Caruso, West Palm Beach, for appellee Eric Rider.
Sidney A. Stubbs, Jr., of Jones & Foster, Monroe A. Coogler, Jr., of Adams, Coogler, Watson & Smith, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellees.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from an order denying motions attacking the jurisdiction of the court over nonresident defendants and denying motions to amend or withdraw answers filed on behalf of said nonresident defendants.
Appellants have filed three points on appeal all of which have been carefully considered and found to be without merit. While we do not approve the procedure giving rise to the problem raised in point III neither do we find any prejudice accru ing to appellants by the de novo hearing held by the successor trial judge. Finally, we believe the record supports the finding of waiver.
Accordingly, the order appealed from is affirmed.
LETTS, C.J., and DOWNEY and DELL, JJ., concur.