ROY M. PACKARD, ET AL.,
v.
EDWARD E. STEVENS

Fla. | 1940-06-25
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur., Buford, J., concurs in opinion and judgment., Chief Justice Terrell and Justice Ti-iomas not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.
143 Fla. 543 Florida Supreme Court (1940)
Also reported at: 197 So. 115

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 affirmed a lower court's decree, finding no errors in the record after reviewing the transcript, briefs, and arguments presented by both parties.


Holding

The Florida Supreme Court found no errors in the decree of the Circuit Court.


Key Quotes

“it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree”

This quote directly states the court's finding regarding the lower court's decree.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The case was submitted to the Florida Supreme Court on a transcript of the record of a decree from the Circuit Court, along with briefs and arguments …

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 heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed. See Luers v. Kuykendall, 135 Fla. 644, 185 So. 448; R. D. Lamar, Inc., v. Ray, 132 Fla. 704, 182 So. 292.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur.

Buford, J., concurs in opinion and judgment.

Chief Justice Terrell and Justice Ti-iomas not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw