GORDON LEE LANDERS, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
GORDON LEE LANDERS, APPELLANT,
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
237 So. 2d 203
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1970)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
The briefs and record on appeal having been read and given full consideration and appellant having failed to demonstrate reversible error, the order appealed is hereby affirmed. Grainger v. State (Fla.App. 1st, 1970) 237 So.2d 132; Brown v. State, 232 So.2d 55 (Fla.App. 4th, 1970).
JOHNSON, C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Conrad v. McMECHEN, 338 So. 2d 1306 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)…g restricted to the county of appellant’s residence. However, this proceeding was initiated pursuant to the provisions of Section 56.29, Florida Statutes (1975); appellee therefore must comply with those provisions. As pointed out in Wilde v. Wilde, 237 So. 2d 203, 204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970): “This rule [Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.560] does not supplant the method provided by statute for the examination of a judgment debt- or, rather it supplements it.” Kline, Supplementary Collection, 25 University of Miami Law Review, p…
-
Nobles v. Ring Power Corp., 531 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…ition pursuant to Rule 1.560. Rule 1.560 “does not supplant the method provided by [section 56.29] for examination of a judgment debtor, rather it supplements it.” Conrad v. McMechen, 338 So. 2d 1306, 1307 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), citing Wilde v. Wilde, 237 So. 2d 203, 204 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970). In Conrad, the court noted that “appellee could have sought discovery pursuant to Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.560 without necessarily being restricted to the county of appellant’s residence.” Appellant further contends that as a defend…
-
Verone Marin Fehlhaber v. Fehlhaber, 664 F.2d 260 (11th Cir. 1981)…). While we have found no Florida case specifically holding that a stay of execution also stays discovery in aid of execution, discovery is a “proceeding in relation to a judgment” under Florida law, see generally Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.560; Wilde v. Wilde, 237 So. 2d 203 (Fla.App.1970), and thus ordinarily would come within the stay. Appellant nevertheless bases her “modification” argument on a statement in the August 1, 1979, stay order that “the stay as to discovery is hereby vacated,” and a conversation between…
Authorities Cited
- Wong v. City OF Miami, 237 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 1970)
- Calloway Brown v. State, 232 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)