F. ADAMS, BY HIS NEXT FRIEND, L. S. ADAMS,
v.
W. A. SAUNDERS, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS ADMINISTRATOR OF THE ESTATE OF N. ADAMS, DECEASED; ALBERT F. SAUNDERS; MRS. JULIE S. DICKERSON, JOINED BY HER HUSBAND, R. G. DICKERSON; MRS. MINNIE A. STRICKLAND, JOINED BY HER HUSBAND, A. J. STRICKLAND; THE BARNETT NATIONAL BANK OF JACKSONVILLE; THE BARNETT NATIONAL SECURITIES CORPORATION; THE BARNETT NATIONAL COMPANY; AND ADAMS BROTHERS, INC.

Fla. | 1938-04-27
Whitfield, Terrell, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.
132 Fla. 494 Florida Supreme Court (1938)
Also reported at: 180 So. 903

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

The Florida Supreme Court denied a motion to modify a supersedeas order, allowing the appellees to renew their application to the circuit judge upon stipulation regarding specific properties affected by an injunction.


Holding

The motion to modify the supersedeas order is denied without prejudice, allowing appellees to reapply to the circuit judge under specific conditions.


Key Quotes

“it is thereupon ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said motion to modify the supersedeas order herein be and it is hereby denied without prejudice to the right of the Appellees to renew the application, upon a stipulation being entered into between Counsel for the respective parties as to the specific properties to be segregated and as to the specific properties to be continued under the operation of the injunction herein, such stipulation and further. application for modification of the supersedeas order to be submitted to the Honorable Hal W. Adams, Circuit Judge, with authority to the said Circuit Judge to enter an appropriate order in the premises notwithstanding the appeal herein.”

This quote details the court's decision and the conditions under which the appellees can seek modification of the supersedeas order from the circuit judge.

Facts & Procedural History

Appellees sought to modify a supersedeas order previously granted in the case. The parties presented arguments to the Florida Supreme Court regarding …

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.

Per Curiam.

This cause having been submitted to the Court upon motion of Counsel for Appellees for an order modifying the supersedeas order heretofore granted in the cause, and the Court having heard argument of Counsel for the respective parties upon the said motion, it is thereupon ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said motion to modify the supersedeas order herein be and it is hereby denied without prejudice to the right of the Appellees to renew the application, upon a stipulation being entered into between Counsel for the respective parties as to the specific properties to be segregated and as to the specific properties to be continued under the operation of the injunction herein, such stipulation and further. application for modification of the supersedeas order to be submitted to the Honorable Hal W. Adams, Circuit Judge, with authority to the said Circuit Judge to enter an appropriate order in the premises notwithstanding the appeal herein.

Whitfield, Terrell, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw