ARNER

v.

MEALS

Citator

Cited By

• Parkin v. State, 238 So. 2d 817 (Fla. 1970)
  …y proof of her insanity defense (see Spevack v. Klein, 1967, 385 U.S. 511, 87 S. Ct. 625, 17 L.Ed.2d 574; Garrity v. New Jersey, 1967, 385 U.S. 493, 87 S.Ct. 616, 17 L.Ed.2d 562; also Simkins v. Simkins, Fla.App.1969, 219 So. 2d 724, cert, dismissed 225 So. 2d 916), in the final analysis it is the manner in which such compelled disclosures are subsequently utilized that determines the application of the protection afforded by the privilege against self-incrimination. It is the attempted use of the information…
• In re Est. of Louise B. Rincon, 327 So. 2d 224 (Fla. 1976)
  …trial court is affirmed. It is so ordered. ADKINS, C. J., and ROBERTS, OVERTON, ENGLAND, SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur. . In re Estate of Humphreys, 299 So. 2d 595 (Fla.1974) ; In re Estate of Arner, 218 So. 2d 471 (Ma.App.1969), cert. den. 225 So. 2d 916 (Fla.). . Kahn v. Shevin, 416 U.S. 351, 94 S.Ct. 1734, 40 L.Ed.2d 189 (1974). . Id. . Fullerton Metal Company v. Abell Howe Company, 299 So. 2d 151 (Fla.App.1974).…
• In re the Est. OF Henry C. Loewy v. Green, 638 So. 2d 144 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
  …d simply by filing a will construction petition at any time during probate, no matter how specious, there is no significance to the limitation period. A similar result was reached in In re Estate ofAmer, 218 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert, denied, 225 So. 2d 916 (Fla.1969), involving a predecessor statute.1 There, the court held that the time for fifing a petition was not revived by the fifing of a petition for a declaratory decree to determine heirs and rights in homestead. In Amer, the court held that any…

Authorities Cited

• In re Est. of Dale D. Arner v. Meals, 218 So. 2d 471 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)