HELEN T. KLOSENSKI, APPELLANT,
v.
JOSEPH THOMAS FLAHERTY, A/K/A TOM FLAHERTY, APPELLEE
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 involves a procedural maneuver where the Florida District Court of Appeal vacated its prior decision and adopted the judgment of the Florida Supreme Court, remanding the case for reconsideration. The Supreme Court had quashed the District Court's earlier affirmation of a trial court order.
The District Court of Appeal held that its prior decision and judgment should be vacated and that the Supreme Court's opinion and judgment should be adopted as its own. The case is remanded to the trial judge for reconsideration.
“Whereas, on.review of this court's decision and judgment by petition for certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed December 2, 1959, 116 So. 2d 767 quashed this court's decision and judgment, and Whereas, the mandate of the Supreme Court of Florida, now lodged in this court, directs this court to remand the cause to the trial judge for reconsideration of his order of October 28, 1958, aforesaid, consistent with the views expressed in the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida;”
This quote explains the procedural posture of the case, detailing the Supreme Court's action and its directive to the District Court.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe District Court of Appeal had previously affirmed a trial court's order. Subsequently, the Florida Supreme Court reviewed this decision and quashed…
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 Mandate Of The Supreme Court cases and more on FLexlaw
Whereas the decision and judgment of this court was entered on the 7th day of April, 1959 (110 So.2d 685) affirming an order of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Dade County, Florida, entered October 28, 1958 in the above styled cause, and
Whereas, on.review of this court’s decision and judgment by petition for cer-tiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed December 2, 1959, 116 So.2d 767 quashed this court’s decision and judgment, and
Whereas, the mandate of the Supreme Court of Florida, now lodged in this court, directs this court to remand the cause to *8the trial judge for reconsideration of his order of October 28, 19S8, aforesaid, consistent with the views expressed in the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida;
Now, Therefore, it is Ordered that the decision and judgment of this court, filed in this cause on April 7, 1959 aforesaid, is withdrawn and vacated and the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court, and the cause is remanded to the trial judge of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit of Dade County, Florida, for reconsideration of his order of October 28, 1958, in the light of the opinions expressed in the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida, dated December 2, 1959, aforesaid; costs allowed shall be taxed in the Circuit Court (Rule 3.16, subd. b, Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A.).
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON, and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Klosenski v. Flaherty, 116 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 1959)
- Klosenski v. Flaherty, 110 So. 2d 685 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959)