D. K. DICKINSON, J. H. DICKINSON, O. H. DENNY AND C. A. VINCENT, PLANTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
FREDERICK W. RAICHL, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
D. K. DICKINSON, J. H. DICKINSON, O. H. DENNY AND C. A. VINCENT, PLANTIFFS IN ERROR,
FREDERICK W. RAICHL, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
105 Fla. 11
Florida Supreme Court (1932)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 140 So. 787
Cited by 1 case
Opinion of the Court
This cause having heretofore been submitted to' the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment 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 judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed. See Bailey vs. Inman, decided present term.
Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Annibelle Jackson and Henry N. Jackson v. Parker, 153 Fla. 622 (Fla. 1943)…deed and mortgage appear to have been co-related parts of one general trans [*638] action, they may all be considered in arriving at the intention of the parties as to the release clause. Gardenia Estates v. Grove land, etc., Co., 104 Fla. 284, 289; 140 So. 787, 789; 22 C.J. 1156, et seq. 3. The testimony of the disinterested third parties may be admitted in evidence to' prove relevant declarations or admissions made by a person since deceased, as against any person claiming under or in succession to such…