Giehler v. Ward
65 So. 2d 742, 1953 Fla. LEXIS 1329
This text of 65 So. 2d 742 (Giehler v. Ward) 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
Giehler v. Ward, 65 So. 2d 742, 1953 Fla. LEXIS 1329 (Fla. 1953).
Opinions
Pursuant to 30 F.S.A.Supreme Court Rule 38, the Chancellor has certified to the Court the following question:
“In suit to enjoin defendants from further violation of agreement not to operate bathing beach in competition with plaintiffs in vicinity "of land sold by defendants to' plaintiffs, for 3 years next after execution of deed by defendants to plaintiffs containing said agreement; and where bill alleges that defendants had violated agreement for first year after conveyance, over protest of plaintiffs, and prays for injunction and that the court extend period of agreement to include one year following expiration of period as originally fixed in lieu of year during which defendants violated agreement, can Circuit Judge make his injunction cover an additional year after expiration of original 3 year period in lieu of year during which defendants violated said agreement?”
We are of the opinion that the certified question does not come within the purview of Supreme Court Rule 38 and hence that the certificate should be denied. See Schwob Co. of Florida v. Florida Industrial Commission, 152 Fla. 203, 11 So.2d 782.
It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Fla. Nat'l. Bank of Jacksonville v. Gardner
12 So. 2d 574 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1943)
Schwob Co. v. Florida Industrial Commission
11 So. 2d 782 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1942)
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Bluebook (online)
65 So. 2d 742, 1953 Fla. LEXIS 1329, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/giehler-v-ward-fla-1953.