PETER PAGNOZZI, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Bennett Stewart Fort v. Fort, 167 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
  …ong the many Florida cases recognizing and applying that doctrine are McMullen v. Fort Pierce Financing & Construction Co., supra; Brooks v. Brooks, 100 So. 2d 145 (Fla., 1958); In Re Fredcris, Inc., 101 So. 2d 49 (Fla.App., 1958); Hadley v. Hadley, 140 So. 2d 325 (Fla.App., 1961); Carter v. Carter, supra; Rayle v. Merrill, supra; and Claus v. Claus, supra. In Hartley v. Hartley, 134 So. 2d 281 (1961), the Second District Court of Appeal, however, recognized the said doctrine as “well settled” but said that “…
• Helene Leslie Lyons v. Lyons, 200 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967)
  …ously noted. The problem which the courts were now faced with was whether Rule 3.8, subd. b, F.A.R., as amended, obviated the waiver rule set forth in the concurring opinion of Brooks v. Brooks. This Court decided in Hadley v. Hadley, Fla.App.1962, 140 So. 2d 325, that in order to bring oneself under Rule 3.8, subd. b, it would be necessary for the appellant to apply to the lower court for an order requiring the payment of the separate maintenance, support or alimony pending such appeal. We held that the wif…

Authorities Cited

• Sie Dawson v. State, 139 So. 2d 408 (Fla. 1962)
• Monty Engel v. Engel, 97 So. 2d 140 (Fla. 2d DCA 1957)