SAM'L D. JORDAN, AS CLERK, ET AL., PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, EX REL. FRED H. DAVIS, AS ATTORNEY GENERAL, ET AL., DEFENDANTS IN ERROR

Fla. | 1930-05-01
Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur., Terrell, C. J., and Brown, J., concur in the decision and judgment., Ellis, J., dissents.
100 Fla. 493 Florida Supreme Court (1930) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases

Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

— This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby,; affirmed.

*494Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur.

Terrell, C. J., and Brown, J., concur in the decision and judgment.

Ellis, J., dissents.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …t considered or determined by Court when the Act was before the Court as shown by the cases, supra. Counsel contends that additional constitutional questions, not previously considered, can be presented and relies upon Jordan v. State ex rel. Davis, 100 Fla. 493, 128 So. 35; DiLustro v. Penton, 106 Fla. 198, 142 So. 898; State ex rel. Fulton v. Ives, 123 Fla. 401, 167 So. 394, and other cited authorities. It is contended that certain grants of power to the laundry board on the part of the Legislature rende…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw