Holland v. Wilson Cypress Co.

Supreme Court of Florida

Holland v. Wilson Cypress Co.

16 So. 2d 815, 154 Fla. 113, 1944 Fla. LEXIS 635

DecidedFebruary 29, 1944

StatusPublished

This text of 16 So. 2d 815 (Holland v. Wilson Cypress Co.) 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

Holland v. Wilson Cypress Co., 16 So. 2d 815, 154 Fla. 113, 1944 Fla. LEXIS 635 (Fla. 1944).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

This cause is before the Court on petition of the defendant below for an interlocutory writ of certiorari seeking to quash (a) an order of the lower court restraining proceedings in a certain common law action now pending in Putnam County Florida; (b) an order of the lower court denying a motion to strike described or designated portions of the bill *114 of complaint; and (c) an order of the lower court denying a motion to dismiss the bill of complaint. We have given careful consideration to the pleadings and briefs filed in the cause, and, after hearing able oral argument at the bar of this Court on the part of counsel for the respective parties, we have reached the conclusion that the petition should be and is hereby denied.

It is so ordered.

BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, CHAPMAN, THOMAS, ADAMS and SEBRING, JJ., concur. TERRELL, J., not participating.

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

PER CURIAM:

This cause is before the Court on petition of the defendant below for an interlocutory writ of certiorari seeking to quash (a) an order of the lower court restraining proceedings in a certain common law action now pending in Putnam County Florida; (b) an order of the lower court denying a motion to strike described or designated portions of the bill *114 of complaint; and (c) an order of the lower court denying a motion to dismiss the bill of complaint. We have given careful consideration to the pleadings and briefs filed in the cause, and, after hearing able oral argument at the bar of this Court on the part of counsel for the respective parties, we have reached the conclusion that the petition should be and is hereby denied.

It is so ordered.

BUFORD, C. J., BROWN, CHAPMAN, THOMAS, ADAMS and SEBRING, JJ., concur. TERRELL, J., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

16 So. 2d 815, 154 Fla. 113, 1944 Fla. LEXIS 635, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holland-v-wilson-cypress-co-fla-1944.