Filed: Jun. 09, 1983
Latest Update: Feb. 22, 2020
Summary: 706 F.2d 1171 R.C. HILTON ASSOCIATES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STAN MUSIAL AND BIGGIE'S, INC., Suncoast International Inns, Ltd., Edward J. Stern, Mariemont Investment, E.J. Stern, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. No. 82-5041. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. June 9, 1983. Wightman, Weidemeyer & Maynor, Carleton L. Weidemeyer, Clearwater, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant. Elihu H. Berman, Clearwater, Fla., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for t
Summary: 706 F.2d 1171 R.C. HILTON ASSOCIATES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. STAN MUSIAL AND BIGGIE'S, INC., Suncoast International Inns, Ltd., Edward J. Stern, Mariemont Investment, E.J. Stern, Inc., Defendants-Appellees. No. 82-5041. United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit. June 9, 1983. Wightman, Weidemeyer & Maynor, Carleton L. Weidemeyer, Clearwater, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant. Elihu H. Berman, Clearwater, Fla., for defendants-appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for th..
More
706 F.2d 1171
R.C. HILTON ASSOCIATES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,
v.
STAN MUSIAL AND BIGGIE'S, INC., Suncoast International Inns,
Ltd., Edward J. Stern, Mariemont Investment, E.J.
Stern, Inc., Defendants-Appellees.
No. 82-5041.
United States Court of Appeals,
Eleventh Circuit.
June 9, 1983.
Wightman, Weidemeyer & Maynor, Carleton L. Weidemeyer, Clearwater, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.
Elihu H. Berman, Clearwater, Fla., for defendants-appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida; Wm. Terrell Hodges, Chief Judge.
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING
(Opinion April 11, 1983, 11 Cir., 1983, 702 F.2d 907)
Before GODBOLD, Chief Judge, RONEY, Circuit Judge, and PITTMAN, District Judge.
PER CURIAM:
1
R.C. Hilton Associates, Inc. requests a rehearing based on the contention that this court's treatment of its claim for tortious interference with a business relationship, see 702 F.2d 907 (11th Cir.1983), is inconsistent with Florida law. In our earlier opinion we did not intend to imply that an enforceable contract between plaintiff and a third party is an essential element of a claim for tortious interference with a business relationship. Hilton's claim fails because he did not establish the existence of an advantageous relationship with Stan Musial and Biggie's, Inc.
2
The petition for rehearing is DENIED.
