JOHN STANSELL, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
JOHN STANSELL, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
108 Fla. 446
Florida Supreme Court (1933)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 146 So. 569
Cited by 2 cases
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.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Angell M. White and Anna White v. Spears, 123 So. 2d 689 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)…where the benefit received is one to which the recipient is entitled in any event — “when there is no controversy over his right to receive and retain it”. (Emphasis added.) McMullen v. Fort Pierce Financing & Construction Co., supra [108 Fla. 492, 146 So. 569]; San Bernardino County v. Riverside County, supra; Paul v. Walburn, 135 Cal.App. 364, 26 P. 2d 1002; cf. Puffer v. Welch, 144 Wis. 506, 129 N.W. 525. Thus, the taking of costs incurred by reason of the sheriff’s levy is no bar to this review. It is…