Broward v. Sledge

58 Fla. 414
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided June 15, 1909·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Shackleford, J.

The facts in this case and the principles of law applicable thereto are not materially different from those in the case of Broward et al. as Trustees v. E. N. Mabry, decided this day, and the conclusion reached herein is the same as in that case. Conclusions of law drawn from the facts of a case cannot be affected by an agreement of the parties. That portion of the decree enjoining the appellants, Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund of Florida, from selling or offering to sell and from conveying, leasing or in any way encumbering the land comprising the bed of Lake Miccosukie is affirmed; and that portion of the decree cancelling patents and adjudging the title to the land between the meander line of the appellee’s land and the middle of Lake Miccosukie to be in the appellee is reversed. The [415] costs of this appeal will be assessed one-half to the appellants and one-half to the appellee.

It is so ordered.

Taylor, Cockrell, Hocker and Parkhill, JJ., concur. W5itfield, C. J., took no part.

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

Broward v. Sledge, 58 Fla. 414 (Fla. 1909).

58 Fla. 414 (Broward v. Sledge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

City of Houston v. Deshotel
585 S.W.2d 846 (Court of Appeals of Texas, 1979)
Kimbro v. Metropolitan Life Insurance Co.
112 So. 2d 274 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1959)
Baker v. State
87 So. 2d 497 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1956)
Foxworth v. Law
82 So. 55 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1919)