Hill v. McDuffie

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hill v. McDuffie

223 So. 2d 115, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5643

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 27, 1969

DocketNo. L-293

StatusPublished

This text of 223 So. 2d 115 (Hill v. McDuffie) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hill v. McDuffie, 223 So. 2d 115, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5643 (Fla. Ct. App. 1969).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an interlocutory appeal from a post-decretal order directing the taking of further testimony.

We have reviewed the previous opinion of this court and the record upon which it is based, as well as the record and briefs in the instant case, and it appears to us that the former opinion in this case (196 So.2d 790, cert. denied, Fla., 203 So.2d 325) is sufficiently clear and unambiguous as not to require the taking of further testimony by the trial court before complying with the Mandate of this Court, and, until such time as further damages or causes of action arise, the trial court is directed to comply with the Mandate of this Court.

The order appealed from is reversed and the trial court directed to comply with the Mandate heretofore handed down by this Court on the original appeal cited supra.

RAWLS, Acting Chief Judge, and JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an interlocutory appeal from a post-decretal order directing the taking of further testimony.

We have reviewed the previous opinion of this court and the record upon which it is based, as well as the record and briefs in the instant case, and it appears to us that the former opinion in this case (196 So.2d 790, cert. denied, Fla., 203 So.2d 325) is sufficiently clear and unambiguous as not to require the taking of further testimony by the trial court before complying with the Mandate of this Court, and, until such time as further damages or causes of action arise, the trial court is directed to comply with the Mandate of this Court.

The order appealed from is reversed and the trial court directed to comply with the Mandate heretofore handed down by this Court on the original appeal cited supra.

RAWLS, Acting Chief Judge, and JOHNSON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

223 So. 2d 115, 1969 Fla. App. LEXIS 5643, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hill-v-mcduffie-fladistctapp-1969.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack