SHIRLEY ANN SCHREIBER, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN RICHARD SCHREIBER, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1969-01-14
No. 68-69
Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.
217 So. 2d 343 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1969) Negative Treatment
Cited by 5 cases

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.

Synopsis

This case involves an appeal that was previously dismissed but has now been reinstated following a Supreme Court order. The appellate court is vacating its prior dismissal and allowing the appeal to proceed on its merits.


Holding

Yes, the appellate court's prior order of dismissal is vacated and set aside, and the appeal is reinstated to proceed to final determination on the merits.


Key Quotes

“Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on March 27, 1968 (208 So. 2d 681) dismissing the above styled cause; and Whereas, on review of this court's judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed December 17, 1968 (217 So. 2d 301) and mandate dated January 6, 1969, now lodged in this court, quashed this court's order of dismissal and remanded the cause for further proceedings;”

Establishes the procedural history and the Supreme Court's intervention.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The appellate court had previously dismissed the appeal. The Supreme Court reviewed this dismissal by certiorari and quashed the dismissal order, rema…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on March 27, 1968 (208 So.2d 681) dismissing the above styled cause; and

Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed December 17, 1968 (217 So.2d 301) and mandate dated January 6, 1969, now lodged in this court, quashed this court’s order of dismissal and remanded the cause for further proceedings;

Now, therefore, It is Ordered that the final order of dismissal of this court filed in this cause on March 27, 1968, which was certified to the trial court on April 10, 1968, including the court’s ruling on appellant’s motion for attorney fees is vacated and set aside and this appeal is reinstated and shall proceed to final determination on the merits.

Appellee’s brief shall be filed within 20 days from this date and the original record on appeal from the trial court shall be transmitted to this court within 40 days from this date. Oral argument will be set by a subsequent notice.

All costs allowed shall be taxed in the trial court upon final determination of the cause (Rule 3.16(b) Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.).


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Fraser v. State, 602 So. 2d 1299 (Fla. 1992)
    …and probation is permissible). Consequently, cases finding that probation or parole should not be credited toward jail sentences are inapplicable to the question presented. See, e.g., Pennington v. State, 398 So. 2d 815 (Fla.1981); Simmons v. State, 217 So. 2d 343 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969), overruled on other grounds by Brumit v. Wainwright, 290 So. 2d 39 (Fla.1973). In this case, Fraser was successfully completing a sentence of community control when he was informed that, through no fault of his own, the sentence…
  • Brumit v. Louie L. Wainwright, 290 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 1973)
    …a right to serve his sentence at one stretch, not in bits and pieces.2 We recognize that our courts have previously approved of parole revocations effective upon the expiration of sentence for an unrelated offense in such cases as Simmons v. State, 217 So. 2d 343 (Fla. App.2d 1969); Duchein v. Cochran, 127 So. 2d 97 (Fla.1961), and Johnson v. State, 185 So. 2d 466 (Fla.1966). We have reconsidered the rule of those cases in light of our decisions in Law and Adams, and we today overrule those cases to the exte…
  • Chambers v. State, 293 So. 2d 752 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
    …sion. Except as indicated above, the judgment and sentence is Affirmed. MANN, C. J., and HOBSON, J., concur. . See Marshall v. State, Fla.App.2nd, 1973, 273 So. 2d 412. . See Rule 3.171(c), OPR, 33 F.S.A. . Simmons v. State, Fla.App.2nd, 1969, 217 So. 2d 343.…

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

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw