WILLIAM H. ROBINSON, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
EBIE EAVEY, EXECUTRIX, ETC., APPELLEES
—TMs is an appeal from an order and decree of the judge of the Circuit Court overruling a demurrer to the bill of complaint, and the cause having been heretofore submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein and briefs and argument of counsel for the' respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree. It is therefore considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Terrell and Davis, J.J., and Johnson, Circuit Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (37 total)
-
Cooper v. State, 336 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 1976)…Fla.1973). . Williams v. State, 264 So. 2d 106 (4th DCA 1972). . Andrews v. State, 134 Fla. 450, 184 So. 88 (1938). . 283 So. 2d 1, 7 (Fla.1973). The general standard of relevance is explained in Atlantic Coast Line Ry. v. Campbell, 104 Fla. 274, 139 So. 886 (1932). . The legislative intent to avoid condemned arbitrariness pervades the statute. Section 921.141(2) requires the jury to render its advisory sentence ‘‘upon the following mat-' ters : (a) Whether sufficient aggravating circumstances exist os…
-
M. David Sims, M.D. v. Brown, 574 So. 2d 131 (Fla. 1991)…nnection with other facts, renders probable the existence of a fact in issue, should still be rejected where, under the circumstances of the case, it is essentially misleading or too remote. Atlantic Coast Line R. v. Campbell, 104 Fla. 274, 282-83, 139 So. 886, 890 (1932). The second ground for reversal by the district court was the exclusion of a manual of the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Hospitals. The trial judge was willing to admit the standards, but not the interpretive commentaries thereon…
-
Dantzler Lumber & Exp. Co. v. Columbia Cas. Co., 115 Fla. 541 (Fla. 1934)…ight to a jury trial of a tort action can be defeated by the fact that the right sought to be enforced by plaintiff is a subrogated right and not the original right. Our own cases so hold: See Atlantic Coast Line R. R. Co. v. Campbell, 104 Fla. 274, 139 Sou. Rep. 886. Compare: Royal Indemnity Co. v. Knott, 101 Fla. 1495, 1502, 136 Sou. Rep. 474. If a tort was committed by the negligent audit of the Dantzler Lumber & Export Company’s books by Ernst & Ernst as alleged, it gave ris'e to a legal right to a tort act…
Previewing 3 of 37 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence