EDDIE SAMUEL IVORY, APPELLANT,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL., APPELLEE
EDDIE SAMUEL IVORY, APPELLANT,
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, ET AL., APPELLEE
364 So. 2d 878
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1978)
Caution
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See: Division of Corrections, State Parole and Probation Commission v. Tamargo, 329 So. 2d 422 (Fla.2d DCA 1976); Section 944.291, Florida Statutes (1974).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Sunshine Bottling Co. v. Tropicana Prods., Inc., 757 So. 2d 1231 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)…22 N.E. 2d 163 (Ind.1993). Because the trial court erred in entering a judgment notwithstanding the verdict, we reverse and remand with instructions to reinstate the jury’s award on the promissory estoppel claim. See Napoli v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 364 So. 2d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978). [*1233] Second, the trial court erred in denying Sunshine’s motion for costs and in granting Tropicana’s motion for costs. This Court has held that “every party who recovers a judgment in a legal proceeding is entitled as a matt…
-
Gonzalez v. Travelers Indem. Co. of R.I., 408 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)…3 (Fla.1954); Royal Insurance Company Limited v. Smith, 158 Fla. 472, 29 So. 2d 244 (1947); Poland v. Phillips, 371 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Alexander v. Kirkham, 365 So. 2d 1038 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Napoli v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 364 So. 2d 878 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978); Florida Cranes, Inc. v. Florida East Coast Properties, Inc., 324 So. 2d 721 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976); Niagara Fire Insurance Company v. Allied Electrical Company, 319 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); Hanover Insurance Company v. Publix…
-
Pitofsky v. Liberty Mut. Ins. Co., 386 So. 2d 1235 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)…he actual contract intended by the parties. Allstate Insurance Company v. Vanater, 297 So. 2d 293 (Fla.1974); Palilla v. St. Paul Fire & Marine Insurance Company, 322 So. 2d 46 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975). Compare Napoli v. Liberty Mutual Insurance Company, 364 So. 2d 878 (Fla.4th DCA 1978) (holding that clear and convincing proof is not required to prevent the entry of a directed verdict against a plaintiff seeking reformation). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Division OF Corrections v. Tamargo, 329 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 2d DCA 1976)