PENINSULA TERMINAL CO.
v.
J. S. STERLING
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.
This case, a companion to Peninsula Terminal Company v. Zaring, involves similar issues and a decree appealed from. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed in part and reversed in part the lower court's decree, remanding for an amended final decree that excludes interest on moneys to be returned, except for interest accrued from the suit's institution.
The Florida Supreme Court held that the lower court's decree was in part correct and in part erroneous. Specifically, the allowance of interest on moneys to be returned was incorrect, except for interest accrued from the date the suit was filed.
“For the reasons pointed out in the opinion in the case of Peninsula Terminal Company v. Zaring, supra, the decree herein is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the cause remanded' to the- Circuit Court with directions to enter an amended final decree for complainant in such form as to eliminate therefrom • all allowance to complainant for in-terest on the moneys adjudged to be returned to him, except interest from the date of the-institution of this suit in the court below.”
This quote explains the court's decision to affirm in part and reverse in part, and specifies the modification required for the final decree regarding interest.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThis case is a companion to Peninsula Terminal Company v. Zaring, et ux., involving substantially the same issues and decree. The specific facts regar…
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.
This is a companion case to that of Peninsula Terminal Company v. Zaring, et ux., this day decided, ■the issues involved and the decree appealed from, being in substance of the same character.
For the reasons pointed out in the opinion in the case of Peninsula Terminal Company v. Zaring, supra, the decree herein is affirmed in part and reversed in part, and the cause ■remanded' to the- Circuit Court with directions to enter an amended final decree for complainant in such form as to ■eliminate therefrom • all allowance to complainant for in-terest on the moneys adjudged to be returned to him, except ■interest from the date of the-institution of this suit in the court below. The costs of this appeal will for the same reasons be charged against the appellant and appellee in equal proportions. Mandate to issue accordingly.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown, J. J., concur. J J ’
Buford, J., dissents.