RUBEN HARPER

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

Citator

Cited By

• Mitchum v. State, 251 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971)
  …ince appellants have not made application to the lower court for modification of its injunctive order so as to make the same less restrictive, as appellants are permitted to do under the decision in Federal Amusement Company v. State ex rel. Tuppen, 159 Fla. 495, 32 So. 2d 1 (1947), notwithstanding that this court has tacitly suggested to appellants on two prior occasions in opinions rendered in this cause that such avenue is available and open to them if they can adduce evidence of the intention to operate…
• Cent. Theatres, Inc. v. State of Fla. ex rel. Herbert Braren, 161 So. 2d 558 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)
  …s conducting its business in a manner critically detrimental to the health, morals or property rights of the community. Cf. Mayflower Holding Co., Inc. v. Warrick, 1940, 143 Fla. 125, 196 So. 428; Federal Amusement Co. v. State ex rel. Tuppen, 1947, 159 Fla. 495, 32 So. 2d 1; Bartlett v. Moats, 1935, 120 Fla. 61, 162 So. 477 ; 52 Am.Jur., Theatres, Etc., § 45. Accordingly the hasty action against the defendant was without justification unless the described scenes should be deemed clearly a nuisance per se;…
• Five SKY, Inc. v. State of Fla. ex rel. Richard E. Gerstein, 131 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)
  …ful business conducted in an orderly and lawful manner on the premises. See Fasson v. State ex rel. Burton, 141 Fla. 367, 193 So. 299; State ex rel. Moore v. Gillian, 141 Fla. 707, 193 So. 751. See also Federal Amusement Co. v. State ex rel. Tuppen, 159 Fla. 495, 32 So. 2d 1. However, the record shows, and the chancellor so found, that the appellants here could not operate their legitimate business at the Five O’Clock Club without permitting the acts of lewdness, assignation and solicitation for prostitutio…