THE STONEMAN COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION; MARSHALL'S SHOE FACTORY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
BRIGGS & WARR, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
THE STONEMAN COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION; MARSHALL'S SHOE FACTORY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
BRIGGS & WARR, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
110 Fla. 107
Florida Supreme Court (1933)
Caution
Also reported at: 148 So. 557
Cited by 8 cases
Opinion of the Court
This cause having heretofore been sub-mited to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for 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 said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed. See opinion in Stoneman Co. v. Briggs filed at this' term.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Latham, 125 Fla. 69 (Fla. 1936)…ty of the ballots actually received into the ballot boxes can be inquired into in this kind of a proceeding. The Court is of the opinion, moreover, that upon the authority of the decision of this Court in the case of Farmer v. Carson, 110 Fla. 245, 148 Sou. Rep. 557, the election contest proceeding that is shown to have been instituted by relator in the Circuit Court of Volusia County under authority of Sections 416 C. G. L., 359 R. G. S., 444 C. G. L., 379 R. G. S., affords an efficient available remedy and le…
-
Gore v. Harris, 772 So. 2d 1243 (Fla. 2000)…Legislature may be contested “in the circuit court”). This Court has recognized that the purpose of the election contest statute is “to afford a simple and speedy means of contesting election to stated offices.” Farmer v. Carson, 110 Fla. 245, 251, 148 So. 557, 559 (1933). In carefully construing the contest statute, no single statutory provision will be construed in such a way as to render meaningless or absurd any other statutory provision. See Amente v. Newman, 653 So. 2d 1030, 1032 (Fla.1995). In int…
-
McPHERSON v. Flynn, 397 So. 2d 665 (Fla. 1981)…75, 32 So. 2d 826 (1947). The statutory election contest has been interpreted as referring only to consideration of the balloting and counting process. State ex rel. Peacock v. Latham, 125 Fla. 69, 169 So. 597 (1936); Farmer v. Carson, 110 Fla. 245, 148 So. 557 (1933). The balloting process is distinct from the legal qualifications of the candidates, and we can find no authority for extending an election contest to areas outside the balloting process. See State ex rel. Gandy v. Page, 125 Fla. 453, 170 So.…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence