Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County
| Citation | 429 So.2d 343 |
| Decision Date | 08 March 1983 |
| Docket Number | 81-2398,Nos. 81-2394,s. 81-2394 |
| Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
| Parties | PARSONS & WHITTEMORE, INC., a New York corporation, Paul & Thomson, a Florida partnership, Resources Recovery (Dade County) Inc., a Delaware corporation, and Resources Recovery (Dade County) Construction Corp., a Delaware corporation, Appellants, v. METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, a subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellee. GREENBERG, TRAURIG, ASKEW, HOFFMAN, LIPOFF, QUENTEL & WOLFF, P.A., a Florida Professional Association, and Metropolitan Dade County, a subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellants, v. RESOURCES RECOVERY (DADE COUNTY) INC., a Delaware corporation, Appellee. |
Page 343
Thomson, a Florida partnership, Resources Recovery (Dade
County) Inc., a Delaware corporation, and Resources Recovery
(Dade County) Construction Corp., a Delaware corporation, Appellants,
v.
METROPOLITAN DADE COUNTY, a subdivision of the State of
Florida, Appellee.
GREENBERG, TRAURIG, ASKEW, HOFFMAN, LIPOFF, QUENTEL & WOLFF,
P.A., a Florida Professional Association, and
Metropolitan Dade County, a subdivision
of the State of Florida, Appellants,
v.
RESOURCES RECOVERY (DADE COUNTY) INC., a Delaware
corporation, Appellee.
Third District.
Rehearing Denied April 27, 1983.
Page 344
Paul & Thomson and Franklin G. Burt and Richard J. Ovelmen and Charles V. Senatore, Miami, for Parsons & Whittemore, Paul & Thomson, Resources Recovery (Dade County) Inc., and Resources Recovery (Dade County) Const. Corp.
Podhurst, Orseck, Parks, Josefsberg, Eaton, Meadow & Olin, Greenberg, Traurig, Askew, Hoffman, Lipoff, Quentel & Wolff and Alan T. Dimond and Victor H. Polk, Jr., Miami, for Metropolitan Dade County.
Podhurst, Orseck, Parks, Josefsberg, Eaton, Meadow & Olin, Miami, for Greenberg, Traurig, Askew, Hoffman, Lipoff, Quentel & Wolff, P.A.
Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and HENDRY and BASKIN, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal, we are asked to review two writs of mandamus by which the trial court ordered inspection of documents it ruled subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act, chapter 119, Florida Statutes (1981). The writs were issued in connection with a lawsuit relating to the construction, management, and sale of a solid waste facility. We vacate the writ directing the law firm of Greenberg, Traurig, Askew, Hoffman, Lipoff, Quentel and Wolff to permit inspection and remand for further proceedings. We reverse the order directed to the law firm of Paul and Thomson permitting inspection.
Addressing first the question of attorney-client privilege raised by the County's counsel as grounds for objecting to relinquishing records in Greenberg's possession, we follow the procedural precedent of
Page 345
recent decisions of this court. In conformity with our decisions in The Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. North Miami, 420 So.2d 653 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982) and Donner v. Edelstein, 423 So.2d 367 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982), we remand to the trial court with directions that it examine in camera the documents which are being withheld from disclosure under the privileges asserted to determine which, if any, constitute "work-product" materials and are required to be disclosed under the Public Records Act. Tober v. Sanchez, 417 So.2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). The court is directed to retain copies of all records examined as sealed exhibits, so that either of the parties may thereafter seek appropriate review of the trial court's...To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Marks v. McKenzie High School Fact-Finding Team, FACT-FINDING
...of the attributes which are ordinarily associated with a State agency or bureau." 532 N.Y.S.2d at 189. In Parsons & Whittemore v. Metro. Dade County, 429 So.2d 343 (Fla.App.1983), the issue was whether private entities that had entered into business contracts with a county were subject to t......
-
News and Sun-Sentinel Co. v. Schwab, Twitty & Hanser Architectural Group, Inc., SUN-SENTINEL
...730 (Fla.2d DCA 1991); Fox v. News-Press Publishing Co., Inc., 545 So.2d 941 (Fla.2d DCA 1989); Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 429 So.2d 343, (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Schwartzman v. Merritt Island, 352 So.2d 1230 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 358 So.2d 132 (Fla.1978......
-
KMEG Television, Inc. v. Iowa State Bd. of Regents, 88-636
...corporation do not become the affairs of the government. See Dubuque, 420 N.W.2d at 453; see also Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 429 So.2d 343, 346 (Fla.App.1983) (private corporation's mere contract with a public agency not equivalent to acting "on behalf of" agenc......
-
B & S Utilities v. Baskerville-Donovan, 1D07-2918.
...Group, Inc., 596 So.2d 1029 (Fla.1992), and certain language in the Third District's opinion in Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. v. Metropolitan Dade County, 429 So.2d 343, 346 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), required a contrary We reverse the decision not to require BDI to produce for inspection the records......