R. H. CHAPMAN AND WIFE, EDITH CHAPMAN, APPELLANTS,
v.
A. R. NASON, APPELLEE
R. H. CHAPMAN AND WIFE, EDITH CHAPMAN, APPELLANTS,
A. R. NASON, APPELLEE
105 Fla. 656
Florida Supreme Court (1932)
Caution
Also reported at: 142 So. 221
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
This cause having heretofore been 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 decreed by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.
Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State ex rel. T. v. Buckwalter, 112 Fla. 200 (Fla. 1933)…226 U. S. 455, 57 L. Ed. 297, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 167; Note to case of Douglas v. Loftus, (Kan.) L. R. A. 1915-B, 797, 806, et seq.; State ex rel. Gillespie v. Thursby, 104 Fla. 103, 139 So. 372; State ex rel. East Side Bank v. Holloway, 105 Fla. 616, 142 So. 221 Morris, Mather & Co. v. Port of Astoria, 141 Ore. 215, 15 Pac. Rep. (2d) 385; Dillon on Munic. Corp. (5th ed.) Sec. 893; 10 R. C. L. 381; 38 C. J. 546-550; 21 C. J., subject, “Equity,” Sec. 207; Anniston Loan & Trust Co. v. Ward, 108 Ala. 85, 18 So.…
-
State v. Baskin, 111 Fla. 667 (Fla. 1933)…ate v. Mitchell, 108 Fla. 233, 146 Sou. Rep. 207; Humphreys v. State, 108 Fla. 92, 145 Sou. Rep. 858. In the case of State v. Mitchell, supra, this Court distinguished the previous decisions in State ex rel. East Side Bank v. Holloway, 105 Fla. 616, 142 Sou. Rep. 221, and State ex rel. Gillespie v. Thursby, 104 Fla. 103, 140 Sou. Rep. 775, and pointed out why such holdings were not applicable to a case like that now before us, which is no different in principle from the status of things presented in State ex rel…
-
State ex rel. Herbert L. Aldrich v. Mitchell, 108 Fla. 233 (Fla. 1933)…xes already levied. The case is here on writ or error to the final judgment dismissing the mandamus proceeding on the grounds set up in the answer. Defendants in error rely upon the decision in State ex rel East Side Bank v. Holloway, 105 Fla. 616, 142 Sou. Rep. 221, to support the ruling of the Circuit Judge, while plaintiffs in error cite the decision in State ex rel. Gillespie v. Thursby 104 Fla. 103, 140 Sou. Rep. 775 to support their position to the contrary. In the latter cited case (State ex rel. Gilles…1 / 2