JOHN D. LUNDY, APPELLANT,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Schooley v. Kimi T. Judd, 149 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2d DCA 1963)
  …hereto, however, that requisite was eliminated and the section has subsisted in that form to this date. In rendering final decree for the appel-lee-plaintiff, the chancellor placed reliance primarily on one case, viz., Hoffman v. Drennen, Fla.1956, 88 So. 2d 624, a per curiam decision of the Supreme Court without opinion. We secured the file in that case and find the facts there to have been well stated by the chancellor in the instant case as follows: “Martha Kate Drennen, a citizen and resident of Frankl…

  ← 1 / 2 →
• Acme Specialty Corp. v. City OF Miami, 292 So. 2d 379 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)
  …* .* * Schooley v. Judd, Fla.App.1963, 149 So. 2d 587, wherein the following is found in part: * * * * * “In rendering the decree for the plaintiff, the chancellor stated that he relied on the per curiam decision of Hoffman v. Drennen, Fla.1956, 88 So. 2d 624. This was a decision without opinion affirming a decree. We are of the view that such a decision does not establish any point of law; and there is no presumption that the affirmance was on the merits.” * * * * * (This opinion was reversed on other…
• State v. A.D.H., 429 So. 2d 1316 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
  …49 So. 2d 587, reversed on other grounds without comment, 158 So. 2d 514 (1963), the district court stated: In rendering the decree for the plaintiff, the chancellor stated that he relied on the per curiam decision of Hoffman v. Drennan, Fla. 1956, 88 So. 2d 624. This was a decision without opinion affirming a decree. We are of the view that such a decision does not establish any point of law; and there is no [*1319] presumption that the affirmance was on the merits. * ‡ st: sfc sf: In Acme Specialty Corp…