Green, Et Ux. v. Parmelee

183 So. 726, 134 Fla. 289
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedOctober 14, 1938
StatusPublished
Cited by2 cases

This text of 183 So. 726 (Green, Et Ux. v. Parmelee) 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
Green, Et Ux. v. Parmelee, 183 So. 726, 134 Fla. 289 (Fla. 1938).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The appeal brings for review final decree of foreclosure of an alleged vendor’s lien.

Defendants were served with process and appeared by counsel in the cause and thereafter suffered decree pro confesso to be entered against them and the cause to proceed ex parte.

The questions attempted to be presented- here may have been of merit had they been presented in due course in the court below. They were not so presented and, therefore, we may not now adjudicate them.

*290 The decree must be affirmed.

So ordered.

Affirmed.

Ellis, C. J , and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur. Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

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

Related

Godshalk v. City of Winter Park
95 So. 2d 9 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1957)
Anders v. Anders
13 So. 2d 603 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1943)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
183 So. 726, 134 Fla. 289, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/green-et-ux-v-parmelee-fla-1938.