CHARLES S. CONE, ET AL., PETITIONERS,
v.
LOTTIE K. BENJAMIN, INDIVIDUALLY, ETC., JOE W. DAVIS, INDIVIDUALLY, MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, GLOBE INDEMNITY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
CHARLES S. CONE, ET AL., PETITIONERS,
LOTTIE K. BENJAMIN, INDIVIDUALLY, ETC., JOE W. DAVIS, INDIVIDUALLY, MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ROYAL INDEMNITY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, GLOBE INDEMNITY COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ET AL., RESPONDENTS
145 Fla. 22
Florida Supreme Court (1940)
Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 199 So. 927
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
Upon consideration of the petition for writ *23of certiorari to the order of the Circuit Court dated July 28, 1939, this Court is of the opinion that no error is made to appear in said order and the petition for certiorari is- accordingly denied.
Certiorari denied.
Terrell, C. J., Brown, Buford and Thomas, J. J., concur.
. Whitfield and Chapman, J. J., dissent.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Cone v. Lottie K. Benjamin, 157 Fla. 800 (Fla. 1946)…t review by certiorari of an order of the chancellor dismissing their first amended bill in so far as it sought to recover against the sureties on certain administrative bonds. This court upheld the order and certiorari was denied. Cone v. Benjamin, 145 Fla. 22, 199 So. 927. In the second amended bill, above referred to, plaintiffs, among other things, attacked the validity of the appointments of the administrators of the estates of Ada Cone Stewart and of Harrison J. Stewart, respectively, and sought to h…
-
Cone v. Lottie K. Benjamin, 150 Fla. 419 (Fla. 1942)…y Company (d) Globe Indemnity Company; and (e) Maryland Casualty Company, and the same were by the lower court granted, and on petition for interlocutory writ of certiorari the same was affirmed by this Court. See Cone, et al., vs. Benjamin, et al., 145 Fla. 22, 199 So. 927, and Cone, et al., v. Benjamin, 142 Fla. 604, 195 So. 416. A second amended bill of complaint was filed in which all the material allegations of the first amended bill were set forth and alleged, and, in addition thereto, as contended…1 / 2