JOHN E. BIGLER, JR., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE ET AL., APPELLEES
JOHN E. BIGLER, JR., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE ET AL., APPELLEES
392 So. 2d 249
Florida Supreme Court (1979)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 10 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We accepted jurisdiction in this case under the provisions of article V, section 3(b)(1), Florida Constitution. After briefing and oral argument we are convinced that the trial court ruled that it did not have jurisdiction of the subject matter of this suit. Therefore, the trial court’s ruling on the constitutionality of the statutes under consideration is null and void.
Such a void ruling is incapable of vesting this court with jurisdiction as contemplated by the constitution.
Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed.
ENGLAND, C. J., and BOYD, OVER-TON, SUNDBERG, HATCHETT and ALDERMAN, JJ., concur. ADKINS, J., dissents.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cripe v. Atl. First Nat'l Bank OF Daytona Beach, 422 So. 2d 820 (Fla. 1982)…operly disregarding the trial court’s findings of fact, and therefore it conflicts with decisions of this Court holding that an appellate court may not re-weigh evidence and substitute its judgment for that of the trier of fact. Marshall v. Johnson, 392 So. 2d 249 (Fla.1980); Delgado v. Strong, 360 So. 2d 73 (Fla.1978); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976); Westerman v. Shell’s City, Inc., 265 So. 2d 43 (Fla.1972). We have jurisdiction. Art. V, § 3(b)(3), Fla.Const. Atlantic First National Bank of Daytona…
-
DK Arena, Inc. v. EB Acquisitions I, LLC, 112 So. 3d 85 (Fla. 2013)…is, 773 So. 2d 7 (Fla.2000)). However, the trial court’s findings of fact are presumptively correct and must stand unless clearly erroneous. See Chiles v. State Employees Attorneys Guild, 734 So. 2d 1030, 1034 (Fla.1999) (citing Marshall v. Johnson, 392 So. 2d 249, 250 (Fla.1980)). For the reasons discussed below, we conclude that the Fourth District incorrectly relied on the doctrine of promissory estoppel as an exception to the Statute of Frauds. Accordingly, we quash the decision of the district court to t…
-
White v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 563 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990)…ublic use of Crandon Park during the tournament, and does bar public use of the tennis complex, for extended periods of time.” Maj. op. at 124. This holding is based on a clearly impermissible reevaluation of the evidence. E.g., Marshall v. Johnson, 392 So. 2d 249 (Fla.1980) (appellate court may not substitute its judgment for that of the trial court by reevaluating the evidence in the cause). Although the plaintiffs alleged that the tennis complex is totally closed to the public for some eight to nine weeks…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence