HILLSBOROUGH COUNTY
v.
A. K. HARTZELL

Fla. | 1935-08-29
Whitfield, C. J., and Terrell, Buford and Davis, J. J., concur.
121 Fla. 353 Florida Supreme Court (1935) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 163 So. 926
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam

Per Curiam

In this case the same legal questions and principles of law are involved which were involved and determined by this Court in the case of Hillsborough County, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, et al., v. John F. DeSear and Mary DeSear, his wife. Therefore, the decree appealed from in this case should be affirmed on authority of the opinion and judgment in that case, filed July 1, 1935.

It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, C. J., and Terrell, Buford and Davis, J. J., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Sholtz v. State, 124 Fla. 164 (Fla. 1936)
    …r oral argument and deliberate reconsideration, whether or not this case is at all distinguishable, in principle, from the cases of State, ex rel. Andrews, v. Sholtz, 120 Fla. 423, 162 Sou. Rep. 865; State, ex rel. Chalmers, v. Sholtz, 121 Fla. 514, 163 Sou. Rep. 926; Sholtz v. State, ex rel. Chalmers, 123 Fla. 100, 166 Sou. Rep. 319, Sholtz v. State, ex rel. Ben Hur Life Association, 122 Fla. 238, 165 Sou. Rep. 34, and Sholtz v. State, ex rel. Ben Hur Life Association, 122 Fla. 249, 165 Sou. Rep. 39, heretofore…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw