Home/Supreme Court of Florida/Hoffman v. Murphy

Hoffman v. Murphy

95 So. 2d 244
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedOctober 10, 1956
StatusPublished
Cited by6 cases

This text of 95 So. 2d 244 (Hoffman v. Murphy) 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
Hoffman v. Murphy, 95 So. 2d 244 (Fla. 1956).

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on to be heard on the motion of appellee to affirm the judgment appealed from pursuant to Rule 38 of the rules of this court, 31 F.S.A., and it appearing to the court from an examination of the record that said motion is appropriate and seasonably made and that it is manifest that the questions raised on appeal are without substantial merit and need no further argument;

It is accordingly ordered, adjudged and decreed that the motion to affirm the judg[245]*245ment appealed from be, and the same hereby granted, and the judgment is is,

Affirmed.

THOMAS, Acting Chief Justice, and ROBERTS, THORNAL and BUFORD, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Pitzer v. Union Bank of Cal.
9 P.3d 805 (Washington Supreme Court, 2000)
Pitzer v. Union Bank of California
9 P.3d 805 (Washington Supreme Court, 2000)
Estate of Myers v. Myers
498 So. 2d 376 (Mississippi Supreme Court, 1986)
Roberts v. Jassy
436 So. 2d 394 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1983)
Twomey v. Clausohm
234 So. 2d 338 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1970)
In Re Williamson's Estate
95 So. 2d 244 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1957)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
95 So. 2d 244, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hoffman-v-murphy-fla-1956.