Hibben v. City of Fort Lauderdale

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hibben v. City of Fort Lauderdale

222 So. 2d 245, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5790

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 14, 1969·No. No. 2345·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In our opinion the trial court correctly concluded that under the facts alleged in the amended complaint, the contract upon which the plaintiff sought to recover was within the statute of frauds, Section 725.01, F.S.1967, F.S.A. We affirm the judgment appealed from on the authority of Tanenbaum v. Biscayne Osteopathic Hospital, Inc., Fla.1963, 190 So.2d 777; Manas v. Southern Diversified Industries, Inc., Fla.App.1967, 193 So.2d 480; Swisher v. Conrad, 1919, 76 Fla. 644, 80 So. 564; Yates v. Ball, 1937, 132 Fla. 132, 181 So. 341; and Jenkins v. King, 1946, 224 Ind. 164, 65 N.E.2d 121, 163 A.L.R. 397.

Affirmed.

CROSS, REED and OWEN, TJ-, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

In our opinion the trial court correctly concluded that under the facts alleged in the amended complaint, the contract upon which the plaintiff sought to recover was within the statute of frauds, Section 725.01, F.S.1967, F.S.A. We affirm the judgment appealed from on the authority of Tanenbaum v. Biscayne Osteopathic Hospital, Inc., Fla.1963, 190 So.2d 777; Manas v. Southern Diversified Industries, Inc., Fla.App.1967, 193 So.2d 480; Swisher v. Conrad, 1919, 76 Fla. 644, 80 So. 564; Yates v. Ball, 1937, 132 Fla. 132, 181 So. 341; and Jenkins v. King, 1946, 224 Ind. 164, 65 N.E.2d 121, 163 A.L.R. 397.

Affirmed.

CROSS, REED and OWEN, TJ-, concur.

Hibben v. City of Fort Lauderdale, 222 So. 2d 245, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5790 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

222 So. 2d 245 (Hibben v. City of Fort Lauderdale) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related