Goldtrap v. Conner
This text of 529 F.2d 1297 (Goldtrap v. Conner) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
This case, which has been much litigated in the Florida Courts, Growers Marketing Service, Inc. v. Conner, Fla.Dist.Ct.App., 1971, 249 So.2d 486; Jack’s Fruit Co. v. Growers Marketing Service, Inc., Fla., 1972, 261 So.2d 171, makes its second appearance in this Court, Jack’s Fruit Company v. Growers Marketing Service, Inc., 5 Cir., 1973, 488 F.2d 493. The arguments conclusively show that the District Court had no jurisdiction in this case and accordingly the judgment entered is vacated and the case remand[1298]*1298ed to the District Court with direction to dismiss for want of jurisdiction.1
VACATED and REMANDED with directions to dismiss.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
529 F.2d 1297, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/goldtrap-v-conner-ca5-1976.