Beaty v. Inlet Beach, Inc.

Supreme Court of Florida

Beaty v. Inlet Beach, Inc.

10 So. 2d 807, 152 Fla. 276, 1943 Fla. LEXIS 886

DecidedJanuary 8, 1943

StatusPublished

This text of 10 So. 2d 807 (Beaty v. Inlet Beach, Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Beaty v. Inlet Beach, Inc., 10 So. 2d 807, 152 Fla. 276, 1943 Fla. LEXIS 886 (Fla. 1943).

Pincite

Opinion

*277 PER CURIAM:

On reconsideration of petition to recall mandate and reconsider our opinion filed herein on September 29, 1942, we delete from our opinion the sentence, viz: “The Hollywood Development and Harbor Co. accepted the over-payment of $32.25 at the mortgage foreclosure sale, and is estopped to claim it was not properly served in the foreclosure proceedings.” The deletion does not affect our judgment and the motion to recall mandate is denied.

So ordered.

BROWN, C. J., WHITFIELD, BUFORD, CHAPMAN and THOMAS, JJ., concur. TERRELL and ADAMS, JJ., dissent.

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

*277 PER CURIAM:

On reconsideration of petition to recall mandate and reconsider our opinion filed herein on September 29, 1942, we delete from our opinion the sentence, viz: “The Hollywood Development and Harbor Co. accepted the over-payment of $32.25 at the mortgage foreclosure sale, and is estopped to claim it was not properly served in the foreclosure proceedings.” The deletion does not affect our judgment and the motion to recall mandate is denied.

So ordered.

BROWN, C. J., WHITFIELD, BUFORD, CHAPMAN and THOMAS, JJ., concur. TERRELL and ADAMS, JJ., dissent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

10 So. 2d 807, 152 Fla. 276, 1943 Fla. LEXIS 886, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beaty-v-inlet-beach-inc-fla-1943.