JAFRA STEEL CORPORATION, AND THE DIXIE DREDGE CORPORATION, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
CITY OF MIAMI, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, APPELLEE
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 an appeal from a trial court's order denying a motion for transfer and striking a counterclaim, as well as granting summary judgment for the plaintiff. The appellate court, following a mandate from the Florida Supreme Court, vacated its prior decision and affirmed the trial court's rulings.
The appellate court held that the trial court did not err in denying the motion for transfer and striking the counterclaim. It also held that no error was made in granting summary judgment for the plaintiff.
“Pursuant to mandate of the Supreme Court issued on its opinion -and judgment (City of Miami v. Jafr-a Steel Corporation, Fla. 1966, 184 So. 2d 178, filed March 9, 1966), quashing our. decision filed April 20, 1965, (174 So. 2d 624), this court's said -opinion and judgment is vacated and our mandate previously filed is withdrawn, the Supreme Court's judgment is made the-judgment of this court, and the order of the trial court denying motion for transfer of the cause to the circuit court and striking the counterclaim is affirmed.”
This quote establishes the court's obligation to follow the Supreme Court's mandate and its decision to affirm the trial court's rulings on the motion to transfer and counterclaim.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellants, Jafra Steel Corporation and Dixie Dredge Corporation, appealed a trial court's decision. The trial court had denied their motion to tr…
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 Of The Supreme Court cases and more on FLexlaw
■ Pursuant to mandate of the Supreme Court issued on its opinion -and judgment (City of Miami v. Jafr-a Steel Corporation, Fla. 1966, 184 So.2d 178, filed March 9, 1966), quashing our. decision filed April 20, 1965, (174 So.2d 624), this court’s said -opinion and judgment is vacated and our mandate previously filed is withdrawn, the Supreme Court’s judgment is made the-judgment of this court, and the order of the trial court denying motion for transfer of the cause to the circuit court and striking the counterclaim is affirmed. In our earlier opinion of April 20, 1965 we omitted ruling on the appellants’ contention that the trial court erred in granting summary judgment in favor of the plaintiff. On consideration thereof in the light of the record and briefs we conclude no error has been made ■to appear, and affirm. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the trial court (3.16(b), Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A.).
It is so ordered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dade Cnty. v. Apgar & Markham Constr. Co., Inc., 29 Fla. Supp. 156 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1967)…interpretation and application of the procedural rules governing third party practice [*158] in Florida. Third party practice involves only a question of practice and procedure, as' distinguished from jurisdiction considerations. Schmid v. Saphier, 184 So. 2d 908 (4th D.C.A. Fla. 1966). Third party practice in Florida, as provided by the federal rules, was not specifically permitted by the Florida rules until January 1, 1966. Rule 1.180, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure (formerly Rule 1.41), providing for t…
-
Brady v. P3 Grp. (LLC) & Hypower, Inc., 98 So. 3d 1206 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)…nized in Florida practice under then Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.13(8),7 but separate causes of action against third-party defendants were not.8 See Fla. Fuel Oil, Inc. v. Springs Villas, Inc., 95 So. 2d 581, 588 (Fla.1957); Schmid v. Saphier, 184 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966); Pan Am. Surety Co. v. Jefferson Constr. Co., 99 So. 2d 726 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958); City of Boca Raton v. Sharp, 107 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958); see generally, Dennis J. McGillicuddy, Note, Third-Party Practice, 18 U. Fla. L. R. 9…
Authorities Cited
- City OF Miami v. Jafra Steel Corp. & the Dixie Dredge Corp., 184 So. 2d 178 (Fla. 1966)
- Jafra Steel Corp. v. City OF Miami, 174 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)