JOHN W. MARTIN, AS GOVERNOR OF FLORIDA, FOR THE USE OF HERMAN OSCAR AUTH, APPELLANT,
v.
F. MEYERHEIM, AND FREDRICK R. PRATT, AS RECEIVER OF THE BANK OF SOUTH JACKSONVILLE, APPELLEES

Fla. | 1931-04-04
Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and Davis, J.J., concur., Ellis, Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.
101 Fla. 82 Florida Supreme Court (1931) Caution
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

*93Per Curiam.

The record in this cause having been considered by the Court, and the foregoing opinion prepared under Chapter 14553, Acts of 1929, adopted by the Court as its opinion, it is considered, ordered, and decreed by the Court that the decree of the court below should be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.

Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and Davis, J.J., concur.

Buford, C.J.

(concurring specially) :

*94I think the Bill should have been dismissed because the complainant had a clear, adequate and complete remedy at law against the Justice of the Peace and his bond and the disposition of this case should not affect the rights of the complainant to proceed in a court of law.

Ellis, Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.

Concurrence
Buford, C.J.

Buford, C.J.

(concurring specially) : I think the Bill should have been dismissed because the complainant had a clear, adequate and complete remedy at law against the Justice of the Peace and his bond and the disposition of this case should not affect the rights of the complainant to proceed in a court of law.

Ellis, Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Hart v. Savary, 114 Fla. 41 (Fla. 1934)
    …by that amount than they would otherwise have been. The controlling element is the mutual intention and purpose of the parties with respect to the funds. Tinsley v. Amos, 102 Fla. 1, 135 Sou. 397. See also Martin, as Governor, v. Meyerheim, et al., 101 Fla. 82, 133 Sou. 636. The record shows that the money involved here constituted a general deposit. [*44] There was no error in the order granting the motion to dismiss the bill of complaint. The same should be affirmed, and it is so ordered. Affirmed. D…
  • Hardesty v. Smith, 118 Fla. 464 (Fla. 1935)
    …it is paid, then the bank becomes the debtor of the depositor to the extent of [*467] the amount of the proceeds of the check. Andrews v. First National Bank of Tampa, 115 Fla. 67, 155 So. 143. There is nothing said in Martin v. Meyerheim, et al., 101 Fla. 82, 133 Sou. 636; nor in Tinsley v. Amos, 102 Fla. 1, 135 Sou. 397; which conflicts with the view above expressed. Other questions are presented but we find no necessity to discuss them as it is our conclusion that the decree must be reversed, for the…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw