Cone Et Ux. v. Armstrong

136 So. 687, 136 So. 688, 102 Fla. 1139
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided October 8, 1931·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

— This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the order herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said order; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said order of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur.

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

Cone Et Ux. v. Armstrong, 136 So. 687, 136 So. 688, 102 Fla. 1139 (Fla. 1931).

136 So. 687 (Cone Et Ux. v. Armstrong) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.