CARNER BANK OF MIAMI BEACH, A FLORIDA BANKING CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
R. G. WOLFF & COMPANY, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Vacating Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
WHEREAS, the judgment of this court was entered on March 25, 1975 (312 So. 2d 555) affirming the order of the Circuit Court for Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and
WHEREAS, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed March 17, 1976 (329 So. 2d 298) and mandate now lodged in this court, vacated this court’s judgment and remanded the cause with directions;
NOW, THEREFORE, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court entered in this cause on May 12, 1975 is withdrawn, the judgment of this court filed March 25,1975 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court and the order of the trial court dated October 21, 1974 is reinstated. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the trial court (Rule 3.16, subd. b, F.A.R.).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dralus v. Dralus, 627 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993)…the matter was considered after due notice and a hearing is some evidence that notice was given and a hearing was held, bút the pleading attached hereto further establishes notice and compliance with rule 2.060(h). See also Williamson v. Williamson, 335 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). It must also be remembered that when no transcript of the proceedings pertaining to the issues upon which the complaining party seeks review is present in the record, we must assume that the court ruled correctly. Hall v. Bass,…
-
Lawson v. State, 400 So. 2d 1053 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)…appellant waived this error by failing to object, the case must be remanded for correction of the sentence. Ordinarily, the failure to interpose an objection in the trial court precludes the raising of an issue on appeal. Williamson v. Williamson, 335 So. 2d 346 (Fla.1st DCA 1976); Security Mutual Casualty Co. v. Bleemer, 327 So. 2d 885 (Fla.3d DCA 1976). The reason for this rule is that a trial judge should be afforded the opportunity to correct his mistake and thereby prevent the necessity of a new trial.…
-
Newell v. Newell, 464 So. 2d 222 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…1, 703 (Fla.1978); Hartford Fire Insurance Co. v. Hollis, 58 Fla. 268, 50 So. 985 (1909) (syllabus by ct., no. 2); Menendez v. Menendez, 435 So. 2d 287, 289 (Fla. 5th DCA), pet. for review denied, 441 So. 2d 632 (Fla.1983); Williamson v. Williamson, 335 So. 2d 346, 347-48 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976). The balance of the husband’s argument against the attorney’s fee award has no merit. Pfohl v. Pfohl, supra. Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Carner Bank OF Miami Beach v. R. G. Wolff & Co., Inc., 312 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)
- Carner Bank OF Miami Beach v. R. G. Wolff & Co., Inc., 329 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 1976)
- Ercoli v. State, 329 So. 2d 298 (Fla. 1976)