STATE EX REL. M. S. PALMER,
v.
HARRY R. HEWITT, COUNTY JUDGE
STATE EX REL. M. S. PALMER,
HARRY R. HEWITT, COUNTY JUDGE
111 Fla. 355
Florida Supreme Court (1933)
Caution
Also reported at: 149 So. 561
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
This cause coming on to be heard upon the pleadings filed in this Court by the respective parties, including the response and plea of res judicata of the respondent, and upon briefs and oral argument of counsel, all of which have been duly considered by the Court, and the Court being advised of its opinion in the premises;
*356It is hereby ordered and adjudged that the rule to show cause heretofore issued herein to the respondent be and the same is hereby quashed and the proceedings dismissed at the cost of the relator.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Mut. Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n v. Bunting, 133 Fla. 646 (Fla. 1938)…l judge and affirmed by the circuit court, that the circuit court in affirming the judgment arrived at on disputed facts, did not proceed in accordance with the essential requirements of law. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Farris & Co., 111 Fla. 412, 149 So. 561. It is contended that the court erred in sustaining a demurrer to the fourth amended plea, which plea was in this language: “For an amended fourth plea to said declaration, this defendant says that it is untrue that as a result of said injury, and…
-
N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Lecks, 122 Fla. 127 (Fla. 1935)…decreed otherwise. Such considerations set this case apart from the doctrine [*141] announced in Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Wilson & Toomer Fertilizer Co., 89 Fla. 224, 104 Sou. Rep. 593; Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Farris & Co., 111 Fla. 412, 149 Sou. Rep. 561; Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Connell & Schultz, 111 Fla. 572, 149 Sou. Rep. 596, 151 Sou. Rep. 381, which is in nowise required to be abandoned as to litigants affected by the rule declared in such cases. Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur.…
-
Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Cowart, 140 Fla. 596 (Fla. 1939)…of God, or the inherent vices of the animals, etc.” And cites in support thereof A. C. L. v. Hinley-Stephens Co., supra; Walton Land & Timber Co. v. L. & N. R. Co., [*605] 72 Fla. 66, 72 Sou. 485; and A. C. L. R. Co. v. Farris & Co., 111 Fla. 412, 149 Sou. 561. Question 4 assumes a condition, however, which substantial evidence in the record contradicts, viz.: It assumes that the evidence shows that the defendant exercised reasonable care in the transportation and delivery of the cattle, when there is, a…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence