Case Name: INTASYS CORPORATION, f/k/a Health Care Products, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Leslie HODGES, Robert Hodges, her husband, Ryan Sentz, a minor and Molly Sentz, a minor By and Through their natural guardian and next friend, Leslie Hodges, Meditox, Inc., a Florida corporation, Health Care Products International, Inc., a foreign corporation, and Physician Sales and Service, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1999-01-20
Citations: 726 So. 2d 338
Docket Number: No. 98-2038
Parties: INTASYS CORPORATION, f/k/a Health Care Products, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Leslie HODGES, Robert Hodges, her husband, Ryan Sentz, a minor and Molly Sentz, a minor By and Through their natural guardian and next friend, Leslie Hodges, Meditox, Inc., a Florida corporation, Health Care Products International, Inc., a foreign corporation, and Physician Sales and Service, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees.
Judges: SHAHOOD, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 726
Pages: 338–338

Head Matter:
INTASYS CORPORATION, f/k/a Health Care Products, Inc., a foreign corporation, Appellant, v. Leslie HODGES, Robert Hodges, her husband, Ryan Sentz, a minor and Molly Sentz, a minor By and Through their natural guardian and next friend, Leslie Hodges, Meditox, Inc., a Florida corporation, Health Care Products International, Inc., a foreign corporation, and Physician Sales and Service, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees.
No. 98-2038
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Jan. 20, 1999.
Rehearing Denied March 16, 1999.
H. Mark Purdy and Rose-Ann Flynn of Purdy & Flynn, Fort Lauderdale, and Robert J. Becerra and Martin J. Raskin of Ras-kin & Raskin, P.A., Miami, and James M. Picozzi of Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott, LLP, Irvine, California, for appellant.
Kelley B. Gelb of Krupnick, Campbell, Malone, Roselli, Buser, Slama & Hancock, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellees Hodges and Sentz.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Royal Netherlands Steamship Co. v. Quinto de Garcia, 489 So.2d 128 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 496 So.2d 143 (Fla.1986), cert. denied, 479 U.S. 1090, 107 S.Ct. 1299, 94 L.Ed.2d 155 (1987).
SHAHOOD, GROSS and HAZOURI, JJ., concur.