In re Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 403 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1979). · Go Syfert
In re Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 403 So. 2d 926 (Fla. 1979). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
15 citation events (4 in the last 25 years) across 2 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Metropolitan Dade County v. Hall (fla, 2001-04-26)
Top citers, strongest first. 5 distinct citers.
discussed Cited "see" Metropolitan Dade County v. Hall (2×)
Fla. · 2001 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 403 So.2d 926 (Fla. 1981).
cited Cited "see" Hall v. Metropolitan Dade County
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See In re Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 403 So.2d 926, 926, 929-30 (Fla.1981).
cited Cited "see" In Re Amend. to Fla. Rules of Civ. Proc.
Fla. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
Subdivision (d) was repealed by the supreme court; see 403 So.2d 926 .
cited Cited "see" In Re Amendments to Fla. Rules Civ. Proc.
Fla. · 1992 · signal: see · confidence high
Subdivision (d) was repealed by the Ssupreme Ccourt; see 403 So.2d 926 (Fla. 1981).
cited Cited "see" In Re Amendments to Rules of Civil Procedure
Fla. · 1984 · signal: see · confidence high
Subdivision (d) was repealed by the Supreme Court; see 403 So.2d 926 .
In re FLORIDA RULES OF CIVIL PROCEDURE
No. 55134.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Jun 21, 1979.
403 So. 2d 926
Richard P. Brinker, Clerk, Circuit and County Courts in and for Dade County, Miami, for petitioner., Response by Bill Wagner, Chairman, Civil Procedure Rules Committee of The Florida Bar, Tampa.
Adkins, Alderman, Boyd, England, Hatchett, Overton, Sundberg.
Cited by 4 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

On March 8, 1979, the Court proposed new rule 1.450(f) of the Florida Rules of Civil Procedure which would provide for the disposal of exhibits and depositions in civil matters. Absent further action by the Court, the proposed rule was to become effective July 2, 1979. The Court has carefully considered the responses received regarding proposed rule 1.450(f) and now feels that the July 2, 1979, effective date does not allow sufficient time for full reflection on matters raised in these responses. Therefore, the effective date for proposed rule 1.450(f) is, by this order, delayed until further order of the Court.

It is so ordered.

ENGLAND, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, OVERTON, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur.