Beu v. Beu

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Beu v. Beu

194 So. 2d 60, 1967 Fla. App. LEXIS 5227

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 24, 1967

DocketNo. 66-386

StatusPublished

This text of 194 So. 2d 60 (Beu v. Beu) 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

Beu v. Beu, 194 So. 2d 60, 1967 Fla. App. LEXIS 5227 (Fla. Ct. App. 1967).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal involves the correctness of a final decree entered in a declaratory decree action. The primary relief sought by the appellee was a determination of her status or relationship with one Gustav Beu, deceased; i. e., whether or not at the time of his death the appellee was his wife and if so, incidental thereto, the assignment of dower in a certain parcel of real property. The appellee prevailed and the final decree determining her to he the lawful widow of Gustav Beu was entered and dower was allotted.

We have examined the errors assigned and argued by the appellant, and find them to be without merit and affirm. See and compare: Coleman v. Davis, Fla.App.1958, 106 So.2d 81; Martz v. Riskamm, Fla.App.1962, 144 So.2d 83; In Re Coffey’s Estate, Fla.App.1965, 171 So.2d 568.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal involves the correctness of a final decree entered in a declaratory decree action. The primary relief sought by the appellee was a determination of her status or relationship with one Gustav Beu, deceased; i. e., whether or not at the time of his death the appellee was his wife and if so, incidental thereto, the assignment of dower in a certain parcel of real property. The appellee prevailed and the final decree determining her to he the lawful widow of Gustav Beu was entered and dower was allotted.

We have examined the errors assigned and argued by the appellant, and find them to be without merit and affirm. See and compare: Coleman v. Davis, Fla.App.1958, 106 So.2d 81; Martz v. Riskamm, Fla.App.1962, 144 So.2d 83; In Re Coffey’s Estate, Fla.App.1965, 171 So.2d 568.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

194 So. 2d 60, 1967 Fla. App. LEXIS 5227, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/beu-v-beu-fladistctapp-1967.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack