Bailey v. Hutchins

105 So. 269, 90 Fla. 19
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided June 11, 1925·Published

Opinions

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.

West, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Strum, J. J., concur. Ellis, J., dissents.

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

Bailey v. Hutchins, 105 So. 269, 90 Fla. 19 (Fla. 1925).

105 So. 269 (Bailey v. Hutchins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Lewis v. Yale
4 Fla. 418 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1852)
Glinski v. Zawadski
8 Fla. 405 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1859)
Cilabot v. Winter Park Co.
34 Fla. 258 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1894)
Lytle v. Scottish American Mortgage Co.
50 S.E. 402 (Supreme Court of Georgia, 1905)