SPESSARD L. HOLLAND, AS GOVERNOR OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, J. M. LEE, AS COMPTROLLER OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND J. EDWIN LARSON, AS TREASURER OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND COLLECTIVELY CONSTITUTING THE STATE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION AND THE STATE BOARD OF ADMINISTRATION,
v.
J. TOM WATSON, AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Fla. | 1944-02-08
BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.
154 Fla. 64 Florida Supreme Court (1944) Caution
Also reported at: 16 So. 2d 649
Cited by 19 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM:

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed.

BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (12 total)

  • Lendsay v. Polk F. Cotton and Betty Anne Cotton, 123 So. 2d 745 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)
    …or substituted service of process on non-residents, are in derrogation of the common law and must be strictly construed. Cherry v. Heffernan, 132 Fla. 386, 182 So. 427; Red Top Cab & Baggage Co. for Use and Benefit of Fountaine v. Holt, 154 Fla. 77, 16 So. 2d 649; Wedekind v. McDonald, D.C., 82 F.Supp. 678; Fidler v. Victory Lumber Co., D.C., 93 F.Supp. 656; Gallant v. McKinney, D.C., 104 F.Supp. 277. The only reported Florida decision touching upon the question under consideration is Cherry v. Heffernan, su…
  • Paleias v. Wang, 632 So. 2d 1132 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
    …, 374 So. 2d 641 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979); Drake v. Scharlau, 353 So. 2d 961 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978). The rationale for requiring an allegation of nonresidency for substituted service of process was explained in Red Top Cab & Baggage Co. v. Holt, 154 Fla. 77, 16 So. 2d 649 (1944). The supreme court, in construing the predecessor statute to section 48.171, stated that a substituted service statute “rests upon the principle of agency, and the relationship exists only when the defendant is a nonresident.” Id. The Secret…
  • August Tobler, Inc. v. Goolsby et ux., 67 So. 2d 537 (Fla. 1953)
    …aived by the language of the notes, the only notice which the law could have required of the Goolsbys was of their election to accelerate the debt, which was effectively accomplished by the [*539] filing of the foreclosure suit. Murray v. Stalnaker, 154 Fla. 64, 16 So. 2d 650. And the instant case does not involve the forfeiture of any sum of money. Indeed, the Goolsbys, through their counsel, offered in open court to refund Tobler’s initial payment of $5,000, but the offer was refused. It is plain that a…

Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw