FRED W. BARSE, APPELLANT,
v.
A. D. WHALEY, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decree, finding no errors based on established precedent. The court reviewed the record and arguments before reaching its decision.
The Florida Supreme Court held that there were no errors in the Circuit Court's decree.
“it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree”
Establishes the court's finding regarding the lower court's decree.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved an appeal by Fred W. Barse against a decree issued by the Circuit Court, with A. D. Whaley as the appellee. The Florida Supreme Cour…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
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 upon authority of Farrell v. Forest Inv. Co., 73 Fla. 191, 74 South. Rep. 216; Davidson v. Collier, 75 Fla. 783, 78 South, Rep. 983; Smith v. O’Brien, 75 Fla. 252, 78 South. Rep. 13; Travis v. Travis, 81 Fla. 309, 87 South. Rep. 762.; Simpson v. First Nat. Bank of Pensacola, 74 Fla. 539, 77 South. Rep. 204; Burgess v. Wirt, 91 Fla. 425, 108 South. Rep. 169.
Affirmed
Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Barse v. Whaley, 102 Fla. 404 (Fla. 1931)…rever dismissed at the costs of the complainant, Fred W. Barse. Done and Ordered at Tampa, Florida, this 18th day of February, A. D. 1926.” From that decree appeal was taken to the Supreme Court and on July 19th, 1927, the decree was affirmed. See 94 Fla. 295, 114 Sou. 319. Thereafter, on October 1st, 1928, the appellees here, Mary E. Whaley, W. L. Pearson and Citizens Bank & Trust Company, as Trustees under the Last Will and Testament of Arthur D. Whaley, deceased, filed suit in ejectment against Fred…
Authorities Cited
- Farrell v. Forest Inv. Co., 73 Fla. 191 (Fla. 1917)
- Travis v. Sim Travis, 81 Fla. 309 (Fla. 1921)
- Simpson v. The First Nat'l Bank of Pensacola, 74 Fla. 539 (Fla. 1917)
- Smith v. O'Brien, 75 Fla. 252 (Fla. 1918)
- Davidson v. Davidson and Sarah E. Allen, 75 Fla. 783 (Fla. 1918)
- Burgess v. Erle L. Wirt, 91 Fla. 425 (Fla. 1926)