CLIFFORD E. CRAM ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, MIAMI TRANSIT COMPANY, INC., MIAMI BEACH RAILWAY COMPANY, INC., AND SOUTH MIAMI COACH LINES, INC., 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.
This case involves a procedural maneuver where the Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District, vacated its prior judgment and adopted the judgment of the Florida Supreme Court, which had quashed the appellate court's decision and remanded the case for affirmation of the Industrial Commission's ruling.
The District Court of Appeal vacated its prior judgment and adopted the judgment of the Florida Supreme Court, thereby affirming the decision of the Florida Industrial Commission.
“quashed this court's judgment and remanded the cause for the entry of an order affirming the decision of the Board in accordance with the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida”
Describes the directive from the Supreme Court of Florida to the District Court of 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 Florida District Court of Appeal had previously quashed a decision by the Florida Industrial Commission. The Supreme Court of Florida reviewed thi…
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on the 5th day of March, 1963 (Fla.App., 150 So.2d 501), quashing the decision of the Florida Industrial Commission sitting as the Unemployment Compensation Board of Review, in the above styled cause; and
Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment,'by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed June 28, 1963 (155 So.2d 879), and mandate dated September 11, 1963, now lodged in this court, quashed this court's judgment and remanded the cause for the entry of an order affirming the decision of the Board in accordance -with the judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida;
Now, Therefore, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court issued in this cause on March 26, 1963, is withdrawn, the judgment of this court filed March 5, 1963, is vacated, the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and the petition for writ of certiorari is denied;. costs allowed shall be taxed in the Florida Industrial Commission (Rule 3.16, subd. b, F.A.R., 31 F.S.A.).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
In re Est. of Agnes v. Robertson, 372 So. 2d 1138 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)…ncipal one, does not raise a presumption of undue influence so as to impose the burden upon that beneficiary of establishing that execution of the will was not obtained by undue influence. In re Joiner’s Estate, 156 So. 2d 161 (Fla.1963), conformed, 156 So. 2d 166 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963) and In re Duke’s Estate, 219 So. 2d 124 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). Furthermore, the record is devoid of any evidence whatsoever which might lead to the inference of “active procurement” on the part of appellee. The court found, inter ali…
Authorities Cited
- Cram v. Fla. Indus. Comm'n, 150 So. 2d 501 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)
- Fla. Indus. Comm'n v. Cram, 155 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 1963)