WILLIAM SHAYNE, TRADING AND DOING BUSINESS AS DIXIE MUSIC CO.,
v.
H. H. PIKE
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.
In a certiorari proceeding, the Florida Supreme Court granted the petitioner's motion to quash a Circuit Court judgment in Dade County, finding that the legal questions had been resolved in a prior opinion dated January 14, 1938, and that the judgment should be quashed under the established law of the case.
The Court granted the petitioner's motion to quash the judgment of the Circuit Court, finding that the legal questions had been settled in the Court's January 14, 1938 opinion and that under the law of the case as determined therein, the judgment should be quashed.
“it appearing that the questions involved in this controversy have been settled by this Court in its opinion filed herein on January 14, 1938, upon the application of the Petitioner for a Writ of Certiorari, and that under the law of the case as determined by such opinion, the said judgment of the Circuit Court herein should be quashed”
The basis for the Court's decision to grant the motion to quash; establishes that prior precedent from the January 14, 1938 opinion governed the outcome.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involves a dispute where a Writ of Certiorari was issued to challenge a judgment of the Circuit Court for Dade County. The transcript of reco…
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 Law Of The Case Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
The Respondent, the Judges and the Clerk of the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, having moved the 'Court that the Transcript of the Record, certified by the said Clerk and filed in this Court on October 12, 1937, be taken and used in this cause, representing that the said Transcript is a complete Transcript of all the proceedings and the judgment in the cause in the Court below, and the motion having been duly considered, it is now or*863dered and adjudged by the Court that such motion be and it is hereby granted and that the aforesaid Transcript be taken and used as the Return to the Writ of Certiorari issued in this cause.
And Counsel for Petitioner having moved the Court to quash the judgment of the Circuit Court for Dade County to which the said Writ of Certiorari is addressed and this motion having been duly considered after notice given to Counsel for Respondents, and it appearing that the questions involved in this controversy have been settled by this Court in its opinion filed herein on January 14, 1938, upon the application of the Petitioner for a Writ of Certiorari, and that under the law of the case as determined by such opinion, the said judgment of the Circuit Court herein should be quashed, it is now thereupon ordered and adjudged by the Court that the motion of Counsel for Petitioner to quash the judgment of the Circuit Court in- this cause should be and it is hereby granted.
It is further ordered by the Court that the motion of Counsel for Respondent to quash the Writ of Certiorari issued in this cause be and it is hereby denied. ■
Ellts, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown, Buford, and Chapman, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maule Indus., Inc. v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 91 So. 2d 307 (Fla. 1956)…sale should be set aside. And we are mindful of the rule the exercise of his discretion should not be interfered with by us except where he abuses it. Mitchell v. Mason, supra. In Crichlow v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of U. S., 131 Fla. 752, 180 So. 382, we stated that his discretion was large and would only be interfered with by the appellate court in a clear case of injustice. Keeping such principle in mind, we nevertheless conclude that in the instant case the judge abused his discretion. The d…
-
Princess Vladimir Eristavitchitcherine v. Miami Beach Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass'n, 154 Fla. 100 (Fla. 1944)…s that the person making the same was ready, able and willing to give more for the property than the amount for which it was sold.” See also Waybright v. Turner, 129 Fla. 310, 176 So. 424; Crichlow v. Equitable Life Assurance Society, 131 Fla. 752, 180 So. 382; McCann v. City of St. Petersburg, 145 Fla. 158, 199 So. 264. It follows that, even if the orders made by the chancellor [*108] subsequent to the final decree are properly before us for review, we could not hold them to be erroneous. While ap-pelle…
-
Cameo Hotel & Apts., Ltd. v. Rhoda Morris and Audrey Lewis, 543 So. 2d 277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)…AM. In considering objections to a- foreclosure sale the “ ‘chancellor has a large discretion which will only be interfered with by the appellate court in a clear case of injustice.’ ” Crichlow v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc’y, 131 Fla. 752, 756, 180 So. 382, 384 (1938); accord Maule Indus. v. Seminole Rock & Sand Co., 91 So. 2d 307, 311 (Fla.1956). Although appellants complain of the procedures followed at the foreclosure sale, such confusion as may have existed was the proximate result of a chain of e…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence