Hogan v. State ex rel. Williams

95 So. 617, 85 Fla. 27
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJanuary 9, 1923
StatusPublished
Cited by4 cases

This text of 95 So. 617 (Hogan v. State ex rel. Williams) 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
Hogan v. State ex rel. Williams, 95 So. 617, 85 Fla. 27 (Fla. 1923).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is 'a proceeding in mandamus. It is brought to this- court by writ of error. After return to the alternative writ had been made an attorney was appointed by order of the court to take the testimony of witnesses and report same to the court. Pursuant to- this order testimony was taken as if it were a chancery cause. There is no bill [28]*28of exceptions in the record but the record contains what purports to be a copy of the evidence. The motion to strike the pages of the record containing this evidence should be granted. ■ '

The motion to strike is granted.

Taylor, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Browne and West, J. J., concur.

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Taylor v. Gray
25 So. 2d 492 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1946)
Damguard v. Tunnicliffe
117 So. 898 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1928)
State ex rel. Buford v. Daniel
99 So. 804 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1924)
Hogan v. State ex rel. Williams
98 So. 70 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1923)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
95 So. 617, 85 Fla. 27, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hogan-v-state-ex-rel-williams-fla-1923.