FRANK D'ALESSANDRO, ET AL.,
v.
LEE COUNTY BANK & TRUST CO.
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 final decree, finding no errors in the record or arguments presented. The court's decision was based on a review of the transcript and briefs.
The Florida Supreme Court found no errors in the final decree of the Circuit Court.
“It is therefore considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circüit Court appealed from be, and the s'ame is hereby, affirmed.”
This quote directly states the court's holding and disposition of the appeal.
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 of a final decree from the Circuit Court. The Florida Supreme Court reviewed the transcript of the record and the argument…
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
This cause having been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the final decree herein and briefs ahd arguments of 'counsel for the' respective parties, and the record having been 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 adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circüit Court appealed from be, and the s'ame is hereby, affirmed. See Reid v. Barry, 93 Fla. 849, 112 So. 846; Geter v. Simmons, 57 Fla. 423, 49 So. 131; Shad v. Smith, 74 Fla. 324, 76 So. 897; McKeown v. Allen, 37 Fla. 490, 20 So. 556; Florida National Bank v. Sherouse, 80 Fla. 405, 86 So. 279; Mansfield, et al., v. Johnson, 51 Fla. 239, 40 So. 196; Hunter v. State Bank of Florida, 65 Fla. 202, 61 So. 497; Willys-Overland, Inc., v. Blake, 97 Fla. 626, 121 So. 884; Westgersbee v. Dekle, 145 So. 199.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Reid v. Barry, 93 Fla. 849 (Fla. 1927)
- The Fla. Nat'l Bank of Gainesville v. Sherouse, 80 Fla. 405 (Fla. 1920)
- Shad v. Smith, 74 Fla. 324 (Fla. 1917)
- Wyatt J. Geter v. Simmons, 57 Fla. 423 (Fla. 1909)
- Hunter v. State Bank of Fla., 65 Fla. 202 (Fla. 1913)
- Jambs F. Mansfield and Joseph J. Bishop v. Johnson, 51 Fla. 239 (Fla. 1906)
- Addison P. McKeown v. Allen, 37 Fla. 490 (Fla. 1896)
- Willys-Overland, Inc. v. Norris D. Blake, 97 Fla. 626 (Fla. 1929)