Ford v. Acme Roof Decks, Inc.

Supreme Court of Florida

Ford v. Acme Roof Decks, Inc.

168 So. 2d 316

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedOctober 28, 1964

DocketNo. 33530

StatusPublished

This text of 168 So. 2d 316 (Ford v. Acme Roof Decks, Inc.) 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

Ford v. Acme Roof Decks, Inc., 168 So. 2d 316 (Fla. 1964).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By petition for a writ of certiorari we-have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing date April 24, 1964.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law. The petition is therefore denied.

DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, TPIORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

By petition for a writ of certiorari we-have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing date April 24, 1964.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law. The petition is therefore denied.

DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, TPIORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

168 So. 2d 316, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/ford-v-acme-roof-decks-inc-fla-1964.