THE SIROCCO COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF MIAMI, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, ORGANIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. | 1941-04-01
Brown, C. J., Terrell, Buford, Chapman, Thomas and Adams, J. J., concur.
146 Fla. 500 Florida Supreme Court (1941) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 1 So. 2d 725
Cited by 2 cases

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 final 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 final decree; 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.

Affirmed.

Brown, C. J., Terrell, Buford, Chapman, Thomas and Adams, J. J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Hegler v. Hegler, 383 So. 2d 1134 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
    …07. Maryland adopted the Uniform Act in 1957. . “The reversal of a judgment restores the parties to the condition in which they stood before it was rendered.” 2B Southern Digest, Appeal & Error, § 1180(1) (1971). See also: Chitty & Co. v. Granthum, 1 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 1941); Jackson Securities & Investment Co. v. A. Paul Goodall Real Estate & Insurance Co., 28 Ala.App. 339, 184 So. 2d 344 (1938). Moreover § 61.1308(1)(a) 1 and 2 (supra) specifically refer to “commencement of the proceeding” as the controlli…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw