HARRY TOFFEL, TRUSTEE, PETITIONER,
v.
HAROLD P. BAUGHER AND RUTH D. BAUGHER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, KENNETH L. BAUGHER AND KATHRYN L. BAUGHER, HUSBAND AND WIFE, RESPONDENTS
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 discharged a writ of certiorari, finding no conflict between the District Court of Appeal's decision and prior Supreme Court rulings. The Court determined the lower court had accurately distinguished the case, thus negating the jurisdictional basis for review.
No, the District Court of Appeal's decision does not create a jurisdictional conflict with prior Florida Supreme Court decisions. The lower court accurately distinguished the present case from the prior ones.
“We granted certiorari because our preliminary examination of the record suggested a potential conflict with prior decisions of this Court in State ex rel. Weber v. Register, Fla.1953, 67 So. 2d 619, and, Strasser v. Linn, Fla.1957, 97 So. 2d 458.”
Explains the initial reason for the Supreme Court's review.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Petitioner sought certiorari from the Florida Supreme Court, alleging a conflict between the District Court of Appeal's decision in his case and t…
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 Conflict Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
We granted certiorari because our preliminary examination of the record suggested a potential conflict with prior decisions of this Court in State ex rel. Weber v. Register, Fla.1953, 67 So.2d 619, and, Strasser v. Linn, Fla.1957, 97 So.2d 458.
After oral argument and a thorough examination of the record and briefs we have the view that the District Court of Appeal has, by its opinion, accurately distinguished the instant case from the prior allegedly conflicting decisions of this Court. Toffel, Trustee v. Baugher et al., Fla.App., 125 So.2d 321.
We therefore conclude that the record under review is devoid of any jurisdictional conflict with prior decisions. Art. V, Section 4, Florida Constitution, F.S.A. The writ is discharged.
It is so ordered.
ROBERTS, C. J., and TERRELL, THOMAS, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hayes v. Greenwald, 149 So. 2d 586 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)…iness property and the latter because it concerned purchase of property for use in a planned business operation and was regarded as an initial step in such business. Compare Toffel v. Baugher, Fla.App.1960, 125 So. 2d 321, cert. discharged Fla.1961, 133 So. 2d 420, and Berkman v. Ann Lewis Shops, 2 Cir., 1957, 246 F. 2d 44, 49. Substituted service not being authorized, appellants were never subjected to the jurisdiction of the court. A judgment which appears from the record to be void for lack of jurisdictio…
-
A. B. L. Realty Corp. v. Cohl, 384 So. 2d 1351 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…its application. James v. Kush, 157 So. 2d 203 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963), for example, concluded that mere ownership of Florida property was not enough to invoke the long-arm statute. Toffel v. Baugher, 125 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960), cert. discharged, 133 So. 2d 420 (Fla.1961), held that the sale of Florida real estate by out-of-state owners who had inherited the property upon the death of their father, did not subject them to long-arm jurisdiction. The Toffei court distinguished its holding from Weber in this…
Authorities Cited
- WM. E. Strasser Constr. Corp. v. Linn, 97 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 1957)
- State ex rel. Weber et ux. v. Register, 67 So. 2d 619 (Fla. 1953)
- Toffel v. Baugher, 125 So. 2d 321 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)