W. H. HENDERSON
v.
E. L. FORD
W. H. HENDERSON
E. L. FORD
111 Fla. 269
Florida Supreme Court (1933)
Caution
Also reported at: 149 So. 746
Cited by 30 cases
Opinion of the Court
This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon 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.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (13 total)
-
Messer v. Lang, 129 Fla. 546 (Fla. 1937)…de for “a uniform, and equal rate of taxation, and shall prescribe such regulations as shall secure a just valuation of all property,” both real and personal. In his concurring opinion in, the case of State, ex rel. Dowling, v. Butts, 111 Fla. 630, 149 So. 746, in which the writer concurred, Mr. Justice -Ellis, at present the Chief Justice of this Court, said: “The word ‘taxation’ as used in the Constitution' embraces both assessment and collection. It would be simply burlesque to say that the assessment…1 / 3
-
State ex rel. F. T. Hurner v. Culbreath, 140 Fla. 634 (Fla. 1939)…ued the period of redemption to expire in two years. To uphold any other view, this Court must in effect revise and enlarge the life and import of the Act, which we are not authorized to do. The case of State ex rel. Dowling v. Butts, 111 Fla. 631, 149 So. 746, is a complete answer to the contention that Section 9 is violative of Section 1 of Article IX, Constitution of Florida, in that it destroys uniformity of taxation. The gist of the holding in the latter case being that after expiration of the redemp…
-
First State Sav. Bank of Morenci v. Little River Drainage Dist., 122 Fla. 304 (Fla. 1935)…istrict are restricted to the total amount of the district benefits ascertained and set forth in the plan of reclamation. See: Moran v. State, ex rel. Montgomery, 111 Fla. 429, 149 Sou. Rep. 477. Compare: State, ex rel. Smith, v. Butt, 111 Fla. 630, 149 Sou. Rep. 746, text 755 (special concurring opinion discussing Futch Acts of 1933). Therefore all funds on hand (the term “funds” here used being employed in the sense of tax liens capable of being realized upon and converted into cash as well as cash itself aft…
Previewing 3 of 13 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence