Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Coral Gables Imported Motorcars, Inc., et al., Plaintiffs-appellees, v. Fiat Motors of North America, Inc., Defendant-appellant
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. - 680 F.2d 105
July 9, 1982
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida.
Greenbaum, Wolff & Ernst, James M. Brachman, New York City, Woodrow M. Melvin, Miami, Fla., for defendant-appellant.
Lane, Mitchell & Harris, P. A., C. Robert Murray, Miami, Fla., for Coral Gables Imported Motor Cars, Inc. & Rebhan.
Before TUTTLE, KRAVITCH and JOHNSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:
In their petition for rehearing, appellees point out that we incorrectly refer to both appellees in our discussion of the release. Accordingly, we find that our original opinion, 673 F.2d 1234, should be modified as follows. The last sentence of the first paragraph should be deleted. All references to appellees in the first six paragraphs of Part II of the opinion are hereby changed to read "appellee Gables." The last paragraph of the opinion should be changed to read:
Because we hold that appellee Gables' claims were effectively precluded by the release and waiver, we REVERSE the judgment in the amount of $491,827.00 entered in favor of Gables. Because we hold that Rebhan waived his claim of fraudulent misrepresentation, we REVERSE the judgment in the amount of $100,001.00 entered in favor of Rebhan, and REMAND to the district court for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
In ruling on this petition for rehearing, we have reviewed Fiat's allegations of error concerning claims other than fraud and find them to be without merit. To the extent of the above changes the petition for rehearing is GRANTED. In all other respects the petition is DENIED.