HARRY HAIMOWITZ, APPELLANT,
v.
MRS. HAIMI HAIMOWITZ, MORRIS HAIMOWITZ, AND MRS. MORRIS HAIMOWITZ, HIS WIFE, AND MRS. HARRY HAIMOWITZ, ET AL., APPELLEES
HARRY HAIMOWITZ, APPELLANT,
MRS. HAIMI HAIMOWITZ, MORRIS HAIMOWITZ, AND MRS. MORRIS HAIMOWITZ, HIS WIFE, AND MRS. HARRY HAIMOWITZ, ET AL., APPELLEES
68 So. 2d 588
Florida Supreme Court (1953)
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.'
The record and briefs in this cause have been examined and the judgment appealed from is affirmed on authority of Bailey v. Smith, 89 Fla. 303, 103 So. 833; Lippman v. Shapiro, 151 Fla. 327, 9 So. 2d 636; Ake v. Chancey, 152 Fla. 677, 13 So. 2d 6; Knapp v. Fredrickson, 148 Fla. 311, 4 So. 2d 251 and Sapir v. Sapir, Fla., 53 So. 2d 925.
Affirmed.
ROBERTS, C. J., and TERRELL, SE-BRING aud MATHEWS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bailey v. Thyra Mae Smith, 89 Fla. 303 (Fla. 1925)
- Knapp v. Fredricksen, 4 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1941)
- Alton M. Ake v. Chancey, 152 Fla. 677 (Fla. 1943)
- Abram Lippman v. Shapiro, 151 Fla. 327 (Fla. 1942)