Brown v. Woolf Plastering Co.

Supreme Court of Florida

Brown v. Woolf Plastering Co.

165 So. 2d 758, 1964 Fla. LEXIS 2817

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJune 24, 1964

DocketNo. 33303

StatusPublished

This text of 165 So. 2d 758 (Brown v. Woolf Plastering Co.) 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

Brown v. Woolf Plastering Co., 165 So. 2d 758, 1964 Fla. LEXIS 2817 (Fla. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By petition for a writ of certiorari we have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing date January 9, 1964.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law. The petition is therefore denied.

DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

By petition for a writ of certiorari we have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing date January 9, 1964.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law. The petition is therefore denied.

DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

165 So. 2d 758, 1964 Fla. LEXIS 2817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/brown-v-woolf-plastering-co-fla-1964.