Dickinson v. Grootemaat

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Dickinson v. Grootemaat

291 So. 2d 669

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 8, 1974

DocketNo. 73-853

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 291 So. 2d 669 (Dickinson v. Grootemaat) 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

Dickinson v. Grootemaat, 291 So. 2d 669 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is a companion appeal to the case of Straughn v. Grootemaat, 291 So.2d 669. The appellant’s motion for change of venue should have been granted upon the authority of Department of Revenue v. First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Fort Myers, Fla.App.2nd, 1971, 256 So.2d 524. Consequently, that portion of the order denying appellant’s motion to change venue is reversed. The case is remanded with instructions to transfer the action to the Circuit Court of Leon County. That portion of the order denying the appellant’s motion to dismiss and motion to strike is vacated. The court is not passing upon the merits of these motions, because they are matters which should be considered after the change of venue has been accomplished.

BOARDMAN, A. C. J, GRIMES, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is a companion appeal to the case of Straughn v. Grootemaat, 291 So.2d 669. The appellant’s motion for change of venue should have been granted upon the authority of Department of Revenue v. First Federal Savings & Loan Association of Fort Myers, Fla.App.2nd, 1971, 256 So.2d 524. Consequently, that portion of the order denying appellant’s motion to change venue is reversed. The case is remanded with instructions to transfer the action to the Circuit Court of Leon County. That portion of the order denying the appellant’s motion to dismiss and motion to strike is vacated. The court is not passing upon the merits of these motions, because they are matters which should be considered after the change of venue has been accomplished.

BOARDMAN, A. C. J, GRIMES, J., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

291 So. 2d 669, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/dickinson-v-grootemaat-fladistctapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack