Case Name: PALAFRUGELL HOLDINGS, INC., a British Virgin Island Corporation, Appellant, v. Marwin S. CASSEL, Esq., individually and as partner in Broad and Cassel, Attorneys at Law, Marwin S. Cassel, P.A., individually and as partner in Broad and Cassel Attorneys at Law, Broad and Cassel Attorneys at Law, a Florida Partnership, and Broad and Cassel, P.A., a Florida Professional Association, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2003-08-13
Citations: 854 So. 2d 225
Docket Number: No. 3D99-1596
Parties: PALAFRUGELL HOLDINGS, INC., a British Virgin Island Corporation, Appellant, v. Marwin S. CASSEL, Esq., individually and as partner in Broad and Cassel, Attorneys at Law, Marwin S. Cassel, P.A., individually and as partner in Broad and Cassel Attorneys at Law, Broad and Cassel Attorneys at Law, a Florida Partnership, and Broad and Cassel, P.A., a Florida Professional Association, Appellees.
Judges: Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and COPE and GODERICH, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 854
Pages: 225–226

Head Matter:
PALAFRUGELL HOLDINGS, INC., a British Virgin Island Corporation, Appellant, v. Marwin S. CASSEL, Esq., individually and as partner in Broad and Cassel, Attorneys at Law, Marwin S. Cassel, P.A., individually and as partner in Broad and Cassel Attorneys at Law, Broad and Cassel Attorneys at Law, a Florida Partnership, and Broad and Cassel, P.A., a Florida Professional Association, Appellees.
No. 3D99-1596.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Aug. 13, 2003.
Stephen M. Zukoff, Miami; Robert S. Glazier and Sarah Helen Sharp, Miami, for appellant.
Kluger, Peretz, Kaplan & Berlin, P.A., and Todd A. Levine and Abbey L. Kaplan, Miami, for appellees.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and COPE and GODERICH, JJ.

Opinion:
REPUBLISHED OPINION
PER CURIAM.
On the court's own motion, the opinion previously published at 825 So.2d 937 is republished in order to correct the scrivener's error detailed below. See Washington v. State, 92 Fla. 740, 110 So. 259, 261 (1926); Beeman v. Island Breakers, 591 So.2d 1031 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).
On page 989, in the right-hand column, the opinion reads as follows:
Resolution of PalafrugeU's claims against B & C arising out of an alleged breach of fiduciary duty does not affect Hernandez's rights because the rights between Palafrugell and Hernandez are "separate and distinct" from any rights between Palafrugell and Hernandez. See Great Southern Aircraft Corp. v. Kraus, 132 So.2d 608, 610 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961).
825 So.2d at 939.
The sentence is corrected to read as follows:
Resolution of Palafrugell's claims against B & C arising out of an alleged breach of fiduciary duty does not affect Hernandez's rights because the rights between Palafrugell and B & C are "separate and distinct" from any rights between Palafrugell and Hernandez. See Great Southern Aircraft Corp. v. Kraus, 132 So.2d 608, 610 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961).
Except for the above-stated correction, the opinion is otherwise unchanged.
It is so ordered.