J. M. FLOWERS, PETITIONER,

v.

JOHN MISKOFF, RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By

• Woodham v. ROY, 471 So. 2d 132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
  …arily with a stopwatch. On the contrary, the rule of informed discretion announced in May v. State, supra, applies with equal force. See Daniel v. Rogers, 72 So. 2d 391 (Fla.1954); Potock v. Turek, 227 So. 2d 724 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969), cert. dismissed, 238 So. 2d 106 (Fla.1970). In establishing the appropriate time limitation for closing argument, the court should consider the following factors: length of trial, number of witnesses, amount of evidence, importance of the case, number and complexity of issues, amo…
• Levitz v. Levitz, 481 So. 2d 1319 (Fla. 4th DCA 1986)
  …against the husband.1 He drafted the agreement, Capital City Bank v. Hilson, 59 Fla. 215, 51 So. 853 (1910), and, regardless of authorship, the later paragraph should control. Cf. Flowers v. Miskoff 233 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970), cert. denied, 238 So. 2d 106 (Fla.1970); Suncoast Bldg. of St. Petersburg, Inc. v. Russell, 105 So. 2d 809 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958). We find no other error in the trial judge’s orders appealed from and have no quarrel with the conclusion that the wife is not entitled to a $150,000 R…
• Helena Jimenez v. Marks Bros. Co., 530 So. 2d 524 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
  …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Smith v. Whidden, 87 So. 2d 42, 44 (Fla.1956); Daniel v. Rogers, 72 So. 2d 391 (Fla.1954); Potock v. Turek, 227 So. 2d 724 (Fla.3d DCA 1969), cert, dismissed, 238 So. 2d 106 (Fla.1970); 55 Fla. Jur.2d Trial § 104 (1984).…

Authorities Cited

• Flowers v. Miskoff, 233 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)