Case Name: Pannell Kerr FORSTER, Petitioner, v. Vaughn DURHAM, et al., Respondents
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1990-09-13
Citations: 566 So. 2d 256
Docket Number: No. 75529
Parties: Pannell Kerr FORSTER, Petitioner, v. Vaughn DURHAM, et al., Respondents.
Judges: SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, ehrlich, barkett, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. NO MOTION FOR REHEARING WILL BE ENTERTAINED BY THE COURT.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 566
Pages: 256–256

Head Matter:
Pannell Kerr FORSTER, Petitioner, v. Vaughn DURHAM, et al., Respondents.
No. 75529.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Sept. 13, 1990.
Alberto A. Macia and Allen P. Reed of Shea & Gould, Miami, for petitioner.
Michael A. Hanzman and Sally R. Doer-ner of Floyd, Pearson, Richman, Greer, Weil, Zack & Brumbaugh, P.A., Miami, for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
We accepted review of Durham v. Palm Court, Inc., 558 So.2d 59 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990), based on express and direct conflict with First Florida Bank, N.A. v. Max Mitchell & Co., 541 So.2d 155 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989), quashed, 558 So.2d 9 (Fla.1990), and Gordon v. Etue, Wardlaw & Co., 511 So.2d 384 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), disapproved, First Florida Bank, 558 So.2d at 16. We now find that the basis of conflict jurisdiction has been eliminated by our opinion in First Florida Bank. Moreover, we find the result reached by the district court below to be consistent with the analysis in First Florida Bank. Accordingly, this petition is dismissed for lack of conflict jurisdiction.
It is so ordered.
SHAW, C.J., and OVERTON, McDonald, ehrlich, barkett, GRIMES and KOGAN, JJ., concur. NO MOTION FOR REHEARING WILL BE ENTERTAINED BY THE COURT.