MOODY
v.
VOLUSIA COUNTY
MOODY
VOLUSIA COUNTY
113 So. 563
Florida Supreme Court (1927)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 93 Fla. 1115
Cited by 13 cases
Opinion of the Court
This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the order herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and it appearing to the Court that the question presented has become moot; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said order of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.
ELLIS, C. J., AND STRUM AND BROWN, J. J., concur. *Page 1116
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dickenson v. Parks, 104 Fla. 577 (Fla. 1932)…ion. The exercise of any other policy tends to discredit and place the judiciary in a compromising attitude' which is had for the administration of justice.” Power vs. Chillingworth, 93 Fla. 1030, 113 So. 280; State vs. Chillingworth, 93 Fla. 1107, 113 So. 563; State ex rel. First American Bank and Trust Co. vs. Chillingworth, 95 Fla. 699, 116 So. 633; Suarez vs. State, supra; McGregor vs. Hammock, 101 Fla. 1170, 132 So. 815. It follows that' the writ of prohibition should issue from this Court prohibiti…
-
City OF Miami Beach v. Prevatt, 97 So. 2d 473 (Fla. 1957)…fies this property for use as hotel and apartments, the very argument made by appellant necessarily leads to an affirmance of the decree of the trial court. Cf. Gadsden County v. Kerce, 1940, 141 Fla. 596, 193 So. 772; Moody v. Volusia County, 1927, 93 Fla. 1115, 113 So. 563. Also see I Florida Law and Practice — Appeals Sections 181, 182. The city fathers have determined, as they were directed to do in the decree here under review, that the ordinance which restricted this property to residential use is not…
-
Bd. Pub. Instruction LaFayette Cnty. v. First Nat'l Bank of Gainesville, 111 Fla. 4 (Fla. 1932)…legal privilege in our system of jurisprudence; such special interest in order to disqualify must, however, be a pecuniary interest in the results of the action. Sauls v. Freeman, 24 Fla 209, 4 So. 525. See also State v. Chillingworth, 93 Fla. 1107. 113 So. 563; Anderson v. Broward, supra, Johnson v. Wakulla County, 28 Fla. 720, 9 So. 690. From all the conditions and circumstances of this case we cannot say that the trial court committed reversible error in granting the change of venue, nor thereafter ref…
Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence