GRADY A. BARNARD, A MINOR, BY HIS NEXT FRIEND AND NATURAL GUARDIAN CLARA IRENE BARNARD, AND CLARA IRENE BARNARD, INDIVIDUALLY, PETITIONERS,
v.
DAVID JOHN CREWS, RESPONDENT
The petition for writ of certiorari reflected probable jurisdiction in this Court. After argument and upon further consideration, we have determined the writ was improvidently issued. The writ must be and is discharged and the petition is dismissed.
It is so ordered.
CALDWELL, C. J., and DREW and THORNAL, JJ., concur.
WHITE, Circuit Judge (Retired), concurs specially with Opinion.
ERVIN, J., concurs with WHITE, Circuit Judge (Retired).
(concurring specially).
I disagree with the statement of the District Court of Appeal regarding the application of the “Last Clear Chance” doctrine, Barnard v. Crews, Fla.App.1967, 194 So.2d 44, however, I can find nothing in the record indicating that petitioner, plaintiff in the trial court, presented instructions upon the subject to the trial judge, and, in addition, only a portion of the testimony taken during the trial has been brought here, making it impossible to determine whether or not the doctrine was applicable.
ERVIN, J., concurs.
WHITE, JOSEPH S., Circuit Judge, Retired
(concurring specially).
I disagree with the statement of the District Court of Appeal regarding the application of the “Last Clear Chance” doctrine, Barnard v. Crews, Fla.App.1967, 194 So. 2d 44, however, I can find nothing in the record indicating that petitioner, plaintiff in the trial court, presented instructions upon the subject to the trial judge, and, in addition, only a portion of the testimony taken during the trial has been brought here, making it impossible to determine whether or not the doctrine was applicable.
ERVIN, J., concurs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Butterworth v. Caggiano, 605 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1992)…(1948); City of Jacksonville v. Glidden Co., 124 Fla. 690, 692-93, 169 So. 216, 217 (1936). Additionally, Florida courts have consistently held that the homestead exemption in article X, section 4 must be liberally construed. E.g., Graham v. Azar, 204 So. 2d 193, 195 (Fla.1967); Hill v. First Nat’l Bank, 79 Fla. 391, 401, 84 So. 190, 193 (1920). A liberal construction of the homestead exemption is particularly appropriate in the context of forfeiture. Forfeitures are considered harsh penalties that are hist…
-
Seaboard Sys. R.R., Inc. v. Anthony J. Clemente as Dir. of the Dep't of Env't Res. Mgmt., 467 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…ne thing implies the exclusion of another. Ideal Farms Drainage District v. Certain Lands, 154 Fla. 554, 19 So. 2d 234 (1944); James v. Department of Corrections, 424 So. 2d 826 (Fla.lst DCA 1982); Azar v. Graham, 194 So. 2d 684 (Fla.3d DCA), aff'd, 204 So. 2d 193 (Fla.1967). “[W]here a statute enumerates the things on which it is to operate, it is ordinarily construed as excluding from its operation all those not expressly mentioned.” James at 827. In light of the foregoing principle of statutory constructi…
-
Gepfrich v. Gepfrich, 582 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…used to satisfy the alimony arrearages. AFFIRMED. DOWNEY, J., concurs. FARMER, J., concurs specially with opinion. . Thomas Gepfrich was earlier found to be in arrears with his child support obligations. . Thomas' reliance upon Graham v. Azar, 204 So. 2d 193 (Fla.1967) is misplaced since that case is distinguishable in that there was no evidence of fraud.…
Previewing 3 of 9 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Grady A. Barnard v. Crews, 194 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967)