American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Williams

District Court of Appeal of Florida

American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Williams

125 So. 2d 107, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2220

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 9, 1960

DocketNo. C-113

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 125 So. 2d 107 (American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Williams) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

American Fire & Casualty Co. v. Williams, 125 So. 2d 107, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2220 (Fla. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellee has moved to quash this appeal on the ground -that it is frivolous or taken only for the purpose of delay. Florida Appellate Rule 3.9(b), 31 F.S.A.

The factual background of this appeal, which seeks review of a summary final judgment for plaintiff-appellee in a garnishment proceeding, is identical with the case of American Southern Insurance Company v. Driscoll, Fla.App., 125 So.2d 105, in which we have this day filed our opinion holding that the garnishment proceeding should be dismissed. That disposition was based on the fact that we followed a former practice, which we have announced our intention to discontinue, whereby upon reversal of a final judgment sought to be enforced by the proceeding in garnishment we directed dismissal of the garnishment proceeding. However, in regard to the motion to quash now under consideration, the situation is different in that we have affirmed, rather than reversed, the judgment in the tort action the enforcement of which provided the basis for the garnishment involved on this appeal. See the case of Springfield v. Williams, Fla.App. 125 So.2d 145.

[108]*108The motion to quash this appeal is granted on the authority of the within cited Driscoll case.

STURGIS, Acting Chief Judge, CARROLL, DONALD, J., and MASON, ERNEST E., Associate Judge, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

Appellee has moved to quash this appeal on the ground -that it is frivolous or taken only for the purpose of delay. Florida Appellate Rule 3.9(b), 31 F.S.A.

The factual background of this appeal, which seeks review of a summary final judgment for plaintiff-appellee in a garnishment proceeding, is identical with the case of American Southern Insurance Company v. Driscoll, Fla.App., 125 So.2d 105, in which we have this day filed our opinion holding that the garnishment proceeding should be dismissed. That disposition was based on the fact that we followed a former practice, which we have announced our intention to discontinue, whereby upon reversal of a final judgment sought to be enforced by the proceeding in garnishment we directed dismissal of the garnishment proceeding. However, in regard to the motion to quash now under consideration, the situation is different in that we have affirmed, rather than reversed, the judgment in the tort action the enforcement of which provided the basis for the garnishment involved on this appeal. See the case of Springfield v. Williams, Fla.App. 125 So.2d 145.

[108]*108The motion to quash this appeal is granted on the authority of the within cited Driscoll case.

STURGIS, Acting Chief Judge, CARROLL, DONALD, J., and MASON, ERNEST E., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

125 So. 2d 107, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2220, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-fire-casualty-co-v-williams-fladistctapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack