HomeMy WebLinkAbout2362,
`~"J3.5:~5
ST~TI~Y ZZ7C'i~R and MARY )
~;R, his wife, )
Pl.aintiffs, )
)
vs. )
)
S[lrl BANKS OF F"IIJRIOA, Il~1C.. )
etc., et al., )
Defe~ridants. )
IN Z4~ CIEiQJIT 0(X1I~T C~ Z4~ s
J[AICIAL CIRWIT IN Ai~ FC)R ST. I~ICIE
(JOIA~Tt'Y. ~'ii0~ti0A
CIVIL DIVISICN
CA.S~E N0. 79--571-CA
O~2Df;Et C~1 .
SPIPULATION FOR SUgl'IZ[JPIaN C~ 0(XR3S'EL
~IIS CAUSE came on to be heard before the ~urt i~ori the Stipulation
Fbr S~,stitution Of ~oiaisel by and between tt~e law fiYm of Farish, Farish and
Rornani, Aitt~orneys of reoo~rd for ~ Z[K~it and MAR'~t Z~~i~t. his wife, Plain-
tiffs in the abov~e-styled cause, and the l.aa~+i fiYm of Johnson and Bak.st, -P.A.
arxi the aburt being fully advised in t2ie premises, it is thereu~or~:
O~ AND AUJ~JDC~ED that the abavereferenoecl Stipulation For S~b6titution Of
(b~uisel be and the same is hereby Grant~ed and the law fiYm of John.s~ai and Bakst
is sustituted as Atborneys for the Plaintiffs, ST~EY TtICI~R and N~ItY T[~2.
hi.s wi.fe.
pp~~ p~p p~ y of Febn
~
;t
~
;
S
i
3 ~
taoPies furnished c~o~un.sel)
;
~
~
~
~
x
~
515~
fE6 -2 PN 2 47
f~~cc Rtic F~ce~+oro
ST.IUCI[ COtltl~Y.f t A.
RGG~R POITRAS
CLERK CtRCWT C
,,•-~ . . ~~~ -----
8J7K~'t~ FdGE~~
i- ., ~ ~
~-~w~ . ~ ..~~_ __ _m .. _- _ ::