BEE BEE REALTY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, (DEFENDANT BELOW) PLANTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
MAUD I. STRUSE, (PLAINTIFF BELOW) DEFENDANT IN ERROR
BEE BEE REALTY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, (DEFENDANT BELOW) PLANTIFF IN ERROR,
MAUD I. STRUSE, (PLAINTIFF BELOW) DEFENDANT IN ERROR
106 Fla. 706
Florida Supreme Court (1932)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 143 So. 761
Cited by 40 cases
Opinion of the Court
This cause having heretofore been sub*707mitted 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.
Buford, C.J., and Ellis, and Brown, J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (21 total)
-
Bancroft Inv. Corp. v. THE City OF Jacksonville, 157 Fla. 546 (Fla. 1946)…..” Prior to that time, declared the court, the estate of the vendor in and to the property is such that the land is subject to levy and sale under execution as “lands and tenements” of the vendor. So in Marion Mortgage Co. v. Grennan, 106 Fla. 913, 143 So. 761, 87 A.L.R. 1492, it is recognized that even after the execution of such a contract with the vendee in possession the vendor continues holding such an interest or estate in the lands as may be mortgaged; the mortgagee acquiring a lien on the property…
-
North v. Leome Culmer, 193 So. 2d 701 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)…which it arises and their privies. 12 Fla.Jur., Estoppel and Waiver, Sec. 73. Such an estoppel as to privies is effective as to privies in contract, Smith v. Urquhart, 1937, 129 Fla. 742, 176 So. 787; Marion Mtg. Co. v. Grennan, 1932, 106 Fla. 913, 143 So. 761, 87 A.L.R. 1492; and likewise affects personal representatives. 12 [*705] Fla.Jur., Estoppel and Waiver, Sec. 77, as in the present case. Likewise, the Courts of Florida have not been reluctant to apply the doctrine of estoppel so as to bar strict…
-
Smith v. Urquhart, 129 Fla. 742 (Fla. 1937)…35; 21 C. J. 1226 and cases cited. It is also well settled that “Where an estoppel is operative as between the original parties to the transaction it is also effective as to their privies in contract.” Marion Mortgage Co. v. Grennan, 106 Fla. 913, 143 Sou. 761. It is also settled that “The terfn privity denotes mutual [*745] or- successive relationship to the same rights or property.” Coral Realty Co., et al., v. Peacock Holding Co., et al., 103 Fla. 916, 138 Sou. 622; and that “an estoppel by matter of…
Previewing 3 of 21 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence