Goldstein v. Sweeny

Supreme Court of Florida

Goldstein v. Sweeny

42 So. 2d 367, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1002

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedOctober 14, 1949

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 42 So. 2d 367 (Goldstein v. Sweeny) 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

Goldstein v. Sweeny, 42 So. 2d 367, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1002 (Fla. 1949).

Pincite

Opinion

Appellant filed his bill for declaratory decree, praying that his rights be determined and that appellees be required to grant him a reciprocal C.P.A. Certificate as provided by Section 473.19, F.S.A. The bill of complaint was dismissed for laches and the complainant appealed.

It was error to dismiss the bill for laches. The record shows that appellant filed his application for reciprocal certificate May 2, 1946, and that it was rejected August 27, the same year. Shortly thereafter, the application was renewed and was again rejected January 15, 1947. The application was again renewed September 20, 1947. The applicant appeared before appellees in person April 23, 1948, and urged that his application be granted. Months later it was again rejected and the bill in this case was filed July 22, 1948. Whatever delay there was is not shown to have injured any one, nor was any one inconvenienced or embarrassed by it. *Page 368 Jumper Creek Drainage District v. State, 155 Fla. 669, 21 So.2d 459.

The legislature of 1947 enacted Chapter 24164, amending Section 473.19, Florida Statutes of 1941, F.S.A., exacting a two year residence and other requirements of the applicant for reciprocal C.P.A. Certificate, but we think from the facts shown here, appellant made the proper showing and was entitled to have his rights adjudicated under the law as it existed when he first applied. Other questions raised are foreclosed in favor of appellant by Atwood et al. v. Gelbond, Fla., 40 So.2d 458; decided April 22, 1949, rehearing denied May 13.

Reversed.

ADAMS, C.J., and CHAPMAN, SEBRING, HOBSON and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.

THOMAS, J., dissents.

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

Appellant filed his bill for declaratory decree, praying that his rights be determined and that appellees be required to grant him a reciprocal C.P.A. Certificate as provided by Section 473.19, F.S.A. The bill of complaint was dismissed for laches and the complainant appealed.

It was error to dismiss the bill for laches. The record shows that appellant filed his application for reciprocal certificate May 2, 1946, and that it was rejected August 27, the same year. Shortly thereafter, the application was renewed and was again rejected January 15, 1947. The application was again renewed September 20, 1947. The applicant appeared before appellees in person April 23, 1948, and urged that his application be granted. Months later it was again rejected and the bill in this case was filed July 22, 1948. Whatever delay there was is not shown to have injured any one, nor was any one inconvenienced or embarrassed by it. *Page 368 Jumper Creek Drainage District v. State, 155 Fla. 669, 21 So.2d 459.

The legislature of 1947 enacted Chapter 24164, amending Section 473.19, Florida Statutes of 1941, F.S.A., exacting a two year residence and other requirements of the applicant for reciprocal C.P.A. Certificate, but we think from the facts shown here, appellant made the proper showing and was entitled to have his rights adjudicated under the law as it existed when he first applied. Other questions raised are foreclosed in favor of appellant by Atwood et al. v. Gelbond, Fla., 40 So.2d 458; decided April 22, 1949, rehearing denied May 13.

Reversed.

ADAMS, C.J., and CHAPMAN, SEBRING, HOBSON and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.

THOMAS, J., dissents.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

42 So. 2d 367, 1949 Fla. LEXIS 1002, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldstein-v-sweeny-fla-1949.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack