ALLIE JEANNETTE WILKINS AND V. D. S. WILKINS, APPELLANTS,
v.
E. W. COATES, DANIEL CRACOWANER, R. L. DAVIS, E. H. FALK, DOYLE E. CARLTON, SUMTER LOWRY, JR., R. J. RITTER, HATTON ROGERS, W. M. ROWLETT, J. I. TODD, M. R. WILSON, D. F. OWEN, AND H. T. KILPATRICK (SUBSTITUTED FOR THE BANK OF COMMERCE), APPELLEES

Fla. | 1930-11-03
Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
100 Fla. 1125 Florida Supreme Court (1930)

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

This case represents the second appeal by the Wilkins, concerning a final decree from the lower court. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the lower court's decision after reviewing all assignments of error and the entire record.


Holding

The Florida Supreme Court found no error in the final decree of the circuit court.


Key Quotes

“This is the second appeal in this cause, the decision of this Court on the former appeal reversed the final decree of the court below in favor of the Bank of Commerce, appellee (Wilkins v. Bank of Commerce, 95 Fla. 85, 116 So. R. 13) after which the bill of complaint was amended and further proceedings had; and the case is again here on appeal from final decree.”

Describes the procedural history and the context of the current appeal.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

This is the second appeal in this cause. The prior appeal resulted in a reversal of the final decree in favor of the Bank of Commerce. Following the r…

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 is the second appeal in this cause, the decision of this Court on the former appeal reversed the final decree of the court below in favor of the Bank of Commerce, appellee (Wilkins v. Bank of Commerce, 95 Fla. 85, 116 So. R. 13) after which the bill of complaint was amended and further proceedings had; and the case is again here on appeal from final decree.

All assignments of error have been thoroughly presented, and -we have examined the basis of each carefully, and *1126have inspected and considered the entire record, and conclude that there is no error in the decree appealed from.

It is therefore considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said final decree of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw