SAMUEL A. POWER
v.
STATE
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 Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's judgment because the appellant failed to file a brief and the record showed no reversible error. The court reviewed the record despite the procedural default.
Yes, the Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's judgment because the appellant failed to file a brief and the record disclosed no reversible error.
“Because the plaintiff in error herein has not filed his brief within the time required by the' rules of this Court, and seemingly does not intend to do so”
This quote states one of the grounds for the motion to affirm the lower court's judgment.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe transcript of the record was filed in the Florida Supreme Court on March 30, 1936. The Attorney General moved to affirm the lower court's judgment…
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 Motion To Affirm cases and more on FLexlaw
Transcript of record in this case was filed in this .Court on March 30th, 1936. It is now before us on motion of the Attorney General to affirm the judgment of the lower court on the following grounds:
“1. Because the record proper in said cause has been certified to this Honorable Court by the Clerk of the Circuit. Court in and for Dade County.
“2. Because the plaintiff in error herein has not filed his brief within the time required by the' rules of this Court, and seemingly does not intend to do so, and
“3. Because said record does not show that any reversible error was committed in the lower court.”
While under the rules of Court we are authorized to enter a judgment of affirmance on the record upon the grounds stated in the motion, we have considered the record in connection with the assignments of error filed and find that the record discloses no reversible error.
Therefore, the judgment should be affirmed.
So ordered.
Ellis, C. J., and Terrell, and Buford, J. J„ concur.-
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Davis, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Orlando Executive Park, Inc. v. P. D. R., 402 So. 2d 442 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…that this, coupled with the evidence of the extensive efforts of HJ to market a uniform product, presented an issue to the jury on the question of reliance which they obviously resolved in appellee’s favor. In Economy Cabs v. Kirkland, 127 Fla. 867, 174 So. 222 (1937), a passenger in a taxicab was injured and sued the company whose name was carried on the cab. The passenger had telephoned this company, and a cab bearing the colors and insignia of the company responded. The suit was defended on the ground t…
-
Mercury CAB Owners' Ass'n v. Jones, 79 So. 2d 782 (Fla. 1955)…by the negligence of the driver. In such case, it is held that a cab association -is estopped to deny liability for damages negligently inflicted by the driver of a cab bearing its colors and insignia. Economy Cabs, Inc., v. Kirkland, 127 Fla. 867, 174 So. 222; Rhone v. Try Me Cab Co., 62 App.D.C. 201, 65 F. 2d 834. The rule is stated by the American Law Institute’s Restatement of the Law of Agency, Sec. 267, as follows: “One who represents that another is his servant or other agent and thereby causes a t…
-
HERTZ Int'l, Ltd. v. Richardson, 317 So. 2d 824 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…ufficient to support the jury’s finding that the plaintiffs were justified in believing that a Hertz Corporation leased the car. See Greyhound Rent-A-Car, Inc. v. Austin, Fla. 1974, 298 So. 2d 345; Economy Cabs, Inc. v. Kirkland, 1937, 127 Fla. 867, 174 So. 222. See also Seaboard Properties, Inc. v. Bunchman, 278 F. 2d 679 (5th Cir. 1960). The second substantial question presented is whether the court had jurisdiction to enter a judgment against the defendant, The Hertz Corporation. Suit was originally f…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence