Close v. Cunningham

Supreme Court of Florida

Close v. Cunningham

128 So. 429, 99 Fla. 1099

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedMay 15, 1930

StatusPublished

Cited by7 cases

This text of 128 So. 429 (Close v. Cunningham) 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

Close v. Cunningham, 128 So. 429, 99 Fla. 1099 (Fla. 1930).

Pincite

Opinions

*1100 Per Curiam.

This is an action for personal injuries. The record and the briefs of counsel in the cause have been examined carefully. ¥e think the judgment below should be affirmed on authority of Jacksonville Street Railway Company v. Chappell, 22 Fla. 616, 1 So. R. 10, and Jones v. Townsend, 23 Fla. 255, 2nd So. R. 612, construing an Act of 1828, now appearing as Section 4211, Comp. Gen. Laws.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, Ellis, Strum and Brown, J. J., concur. Terrell, C. J., and Buford, J., dissent.

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

*1100 Per Curiam.

This is an action for personal injuries. The record and the briefs of counsel in the cause have been examined carefully. ¥e think the judgment below should be affirmed on authority of Jacksonville Street Railway Company v. Chappell, 22 Fla. 616, 1 So. R. 10, and Jones v. Townsend, 23 Fla. 255, 2nd So. R. 612, construing an Act of 1828, now appearing as Section 4211, Comp. Gen. Laws.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, Ellis, Strum and Brown, J. J., concur. Terrell, C. J., and Buford, J., dissent.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

128 So. 429, 99 Fla. 1099, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/close-v-cunningham-fla-1930.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack