Casperson v. Vander

116 So. 2d 653
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 17, 1959·No. No. 59-283·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed upon authority of the rule stated in Barnes v. Willis, 65 Fla. 363, 61 So. [654]*654828; Clements Naval Stores Co. v. J. S. Betts Co., 85 Fla. 49, 95 So. 126; Golden Gate Development Co. v. Ritchie, 140 Fla. 103, 191 So. 202; McIntosh v. Wibbeler, Fla. 1958, 106 So.2d 195; Mitchell v. Brown, Fla.App.1959, 114 So.2d 178.

HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.

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

Casperson v. Vander, 116 So. 2d 653 (Fla. Ct. App. 1959).

116 So. 2d 653 (Casperson v. Vander) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

McIntosh v. Wibbeler
106 So. 2d 195 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1958)
Golden Gate Development Co. v. Ritchie
191 So. 202 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1939)
Mitchell v. Brown
114 So. 2d 178 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1959)
Barnes v. Willis
61 So. 828 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1913)
Clements Naval Stores Co. v. J. S. Betts Co.
95 So. 126 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1923)