LILA MAE LEWIS, APPELLANT,
v.
C. O. FAUSETT, SR., ET AL., APPELLEES
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 appellate court affirmed a summary decree, finding that the facts of the current case were distinguishable from those in prior cases cited by the appellant. The court found no reversible error in the lower court's decision.
The summary decree entered by the lower court is affirmed. The facts of this case are sufficiently distinguishable from those in the cases relied upon by the appellant, and no reversible error has been demonstrated.
“It is our conclusion that the summary decree appealed herein should be affirmed on the authority of Richardson et al. v. Holman, (1948) 160 Fla. 65, 33 So. 2d 641.”
This quote establishes the court's conclusion and the primary authority for its decision.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe opinion does not provide specific facts of the case. It only states that the case involves a summary decree appealed by Lila Mae Lewis. The court'…
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.
This cause has been orally argued before the Court, the briefs and record on appeal read and given full consideration. It is our conclusion that the summary decree appealed herein should be affirmed on the authority of Richardson et al. v. Holman, (1948) 160 Fla. 65, 33 So.2d 641. We are of the view that the facts in the case sub judice are so clearly distinguishable from those present in the cases of Dade County et al. v. City of North Miami Beach, (Fla. 1953) 69 So.2d 780, and Woodlawn Park Cemetery Co. v. City of Miami, (Fla.App. 1958) 104 So.2d 851, that the principles of law governing those cases neither influence nor control the decision in this case. Appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the decree of the lower court hereby appealed is affirmed.
WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., and STURGIS and CARROLL, DONALD K, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Addie C. Richardson v. Holman, 160 Fla. 65 (Fla. 1948)
- Dade Cnty. v. City of N. Miami Beach, 69 So. 2d 780 (Fla. 1953)
- Woodlawn Park Cemetery Co. v. City OF Miami, 104 So. 2d 851 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)