Florida Title & Abstract Co. v. Nathida, Inc.
91 So. 2d 661
Opinion
■ The decree is affirméd. On the basis of the rule announced in Thomás' v. Thompson, 114 Fla. 833, 155 So.' 321, 'the proof is adequate to meet the requirements of our decision in J. C. Vereen & Sons v.'Houser, 123 Fla. 641, 167 So. 45.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Florida Title & Abstract Co. v. Nathida, Inc., 91 So. 2d 661 (Fla. 1956).
91 So. 2d 661 (Florida Title & Abstract Co. v. Nathida, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Thomas v. Thompson
155 So. 321 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1934)
J. C. Vereen & Sons, Inc. v. Houser
167 So. 45 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1936)