Hebb v. City of Bartow

194 So. 312, 142 Fla. 78, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1322
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided February 27, 1940·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

An appeal was taken from a decree that the bill of complaint shall stand dismissed if not amended in ten days and from an order denying a rehearing.

The suit was brought by a property owner to enjoin the city from closing a street.

The allegations of the bill of complaint do n'ot show a substantial injury to the plaintiff that is materially different, in kind and not only in degree, from inconvenience to the public generally, therefore plaintiff is not shown to be entitled to the relief prayed for. See Bozeman v. City of St. Petersburg, 74 Fla. 336, 76 So. 894.

Affirmed.

*79 Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur. Buford, J., concurs in opinion and judgment. Justices Terrell and Thomas not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.

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

Hebb v. City of Bartow, 194 So. 312, 142 Fla. 78, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1322 (Fla. 1940).

194 So. 312 (Hebb v. City of Bartow) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Halpert v. Udall
231 F. Supp. 574 (S.D. Florida, 1964)
Hanson v. City of Omaha
59 N.W.2d 622 (Nebraska Supreme Court, 1953)