PETE SANDERS

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

Citator

Cited By (15 total)

• Black v. Elliot L. Miller, 219 So. 2d 106 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)
  …Cf. Lunnen v. Hunter, 348 Pa. 402, 35 A. 2d 292 (1944). Only those parties in possession or having the right to immediate or constructive possession are entitled to partition. See Pollack v. Pollack, 159 Fla. 224, 31 So. 2d 253 (1947); Weed v. Knox, 157 Fla. 896, 27 So. 2d 419 (1946); and Radford v. Radford, Fla.App.1960, 117 So. 2d 522; 24 Fla.Jur. Partition § 13. We find, under [*109] these facts, that there was no error in the denial of the prayer of Miller for partition of this property. Mrs. Black, by…
• Choctawhatchee Elec. Coop., Inc. v. Green, 132 So. 2d 556 (Fla. 1961)
  …x on property belonging to the United States, is untenable. The tax here involved is not a property tax. It is an excise tax. There is no attempt here to impose a tax on the United States. In Plymouth Citrus Growers Ass’n v. Lee, 1946, 157 Fla. 893, 27 So. 2d 415, 416, we were confronted with a situation very similar to that we have in [*559] this case. In the latter case a citizen of this state sought to avoid the imposition of the documentary stamp tax, claiming as petitioner does here, that the tax in rea…
• Lambert v. Lambert, 403 So. 2d 484 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
  …e court’s holding was that under the terms of the original decree, the wife had exclusive use of the home for the purpose of raising the parties’ minor children and, thus, the husband did not have the right to immediate possession. Cf. Weed v. Knox, 157 Fla. 896, 27 So. 2d 419 (1946). This holding, however, ignores the rule that a spouse’s right, as custodian of the children of the dissolved marriage, to exclusive possession of a marital home granted by a dissolution decree terminates upon that spouse’s rem…