Foster v. St. Johns Electric Co.

98 So. 75, 86 Fla. 338
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided October 19, 1923·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court, 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 error in the judgment herein rendered upon demurrer to the declaration, in that the declaration does not wholly fail to state a cause of action; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the judgment herein be, and is hereby reversed on the authority of Wertz v. Tampa Electric Co., 78 Fla. 405, 83 South. Rep. 270; Jaudon v. Fidelity Bank & Trust Co., 81 Fla. 115, 87 South. Rep. 313; Peterson v. Daniels Co., 83 Fla. 29, 90 South. Rep. 621; Tampa & J. R. Co. v. Crawford, 67 Fla. 77, 64 South. Rep. 437.

Reversed.

WniTFIELD, P. J., AND WEST AND TERRELL, J. J., COUCUr.

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

Foster v. St. Johns Electric Co., 98 So. 75, 86 Fla. 338 (Fla. 1923).

98 So. 75 (Foster v. St. Johns Electric Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Gregg Corp. v. Burdine
129 So. 868 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1930)
Carlton v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.
116 So. 870 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1928)
Hawkins v. Shore Acres Properties
112 So. 61 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Yon v. Pinellas County Power Co.
112 So. 50 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
McDonald v. Exchange Supply Co.
88 Fla. 80 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1924)