Banores v. Austin

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Banores v. Austin

240 So. 2d 850

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 13, 1970

DocketNo. 70-144

StatusPublished

This text of 240 So. 2d 850 (Banores v. Austin) 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

Banores v. Austin, 240 So. 2d 850 (Fla. Ct. App. 1970).

Pincite

Opinion

MANN, Judge.

Appellant argues that the denial to a wife of damages for loss of consortium while our law allows them to a similarly-deprived husband violates the equal protection clause of our federal constitution, U. S. Const. Amend. XIV, and Section 4 of the Declaration of Rights of the Florida constitutions, F.S.A. As a legal matter, Wilson v. Redding, Fla.App.1962, 145 So.2d 252, and Ripley v. Ewell, Fla.1952, 61 So.2d 420, seem to preclude recovery. But the constitutional questions are squarely raised and accordingly we lack jurisdiction under Fla.Const. Art. V, Section 5. Section 4 vests in the Supreme Court jurisdiction of appeals in which the trial court has construed a controlling provision of the state or federal constitution. Section 5 gives us a residual jurisdiction.

Appeal transferred to the Supreme Court.

HOBSON, C. J., and LILES, J., concur.

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

MANN, Judge.

Appellant argues that the denial to a wife of damages for loss of consortium while our law allows them to a similarly-deprived husband violates the equal protection clause of our federal constitution, U. S. Const. Amend. XIV, and Section 4 of the Declaration of Rights of the Florida constitutions, F.S.A. As a legal matter, Wilson v. Redding, Fla.App.1962, 145 So.2d 252, and Ripley v. Ewell, Fla.1952, 61 So.2d 420, seem to preclude recovery. But the constitutional questions are squarely raised and accordingly we lack jurisdiction under Fla.Const. Art. V, Section 5. Section 4 vests in the Supreme Court jurisdiction of appeals in which the trial court has construed a controlling provision of the state or federal constitution. Section 5 gives us a residual jurisdiction.

Appeal transferred to the Supreme Court.

HOBSON, C. J., and LILES, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

240 So. 2d 850, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/banores-v-austin-fladistctapp-1970.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack