City of Miami v. Olback, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

City of Miami v. Olback, Inc.

133 So. 2d 657

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 23, 1961

DocketNo. 61-64

StatusPublished

This text of 133 So. 2d 657 (City of Miami v. Olback, Inc.) 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

City of Miami v. Olback, Inc., 133 So. 2d 657 (Fla. Ct. App. 1961).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendants who were also cross-claimants in an action for a declaratory decree, appeal a decree declaring that the plaintiff, Olbaclc, Inc., was not liable for the paving of a street even though it is the successor of a subdivider who undertook to pave the street.

The interest of the city is not apparent, inasmuch as the street was paved by the surety upon the bond provided by the sub-divider. The finding of the chancellor that the surety acted as a volunteer because the city had previously waived the requirement for the paving is supported by sufficient evidence in the record to withstand review by an appellate court. E. g., Brenner v. Smullian, Fla.1955, 84 So.2d 44, 49; E. O. Painter Fertilizer Co. v. Foss, 107 Fla. 464, 145 So. 253, 254.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The defendants who were also cross-claimants in an action for a declaratory decree, appeal a decree declaring that the plaintiff, Olbaclc, Inc., was not liable for the paving of a street even though it is the successor of a subdivider who undertook to pave the street.

The interest of the city is not apparent, inasmuch as the street was paved by the surety upon the bond provided by the sub-divider. The finding of the chancellor that the surety acted as a volunteer because the city had previously waived the requirement for the paving is supported by sufficient evidence in the record to withstand review by an appellate court. E. g., Brenner v. Smullian, Fla.1955, 84 So.2d 44, 49; E. O. Painter Fertilizer Co. v. Foss, 107 Fla. 464, 145 So. 253, 254.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

133 So. 2d 657, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-miami-v-olback-inc-fladistctapp-1961.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack