Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders' Local Union No. 104 v. Chambers

Supreme Court of Florida

Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders' Local Union No. 104 v. Chambers

79 So. 2d 687, 1955 Fla. LEXIS 3453

DecidedApril 20, 1955

StatusPublished

This text of 79 So. 2d 687 (Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders' Local Union No. 104 v. Chambers) 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

Hotel & Restaurant Employees & Bartenders' Local Union No. 104 v. Chambers, 79 So. 2d 687, 1955 Fla. LEXIS 3453 (Fla. 1955).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

In this case the chancellor personally heard and observed numerous witnesses in hearings extending over several days. He made detailed findings in connection both with his order granting temporary relief [688]*688and with his final decree, from which this appeal was taken. We have reviewed the record at length, and although the evidence is conflicting, we are of the opinion that the chancellor’s findings are supported by competent substantial evidence, and that no error has been made to appear. See Miami Typographical Union No. 430 v. Ormerod, Fla., 61 So.2d 753, 754, and cases therein cited.

Affirmed.

MATHEWS, C. J., and TERRELL, SEBRING and HOBSON, JJ., concur. DREW, J., dissents. THOMAS and ROBERTS, JJ., not participating.

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

PER CURIAM.

In this case the chancellor personally heard and observed numerous witnesses in hearings extending over several days. He made detailed findings in connection both with his order granting temporary relief [688]*688and with his final decree, from which this appeal was taken. We have reviewed the record at length, and although the evidence is conflicting, we are of the opinion that the chancellor’s findings are supported by competent substantial evidence, and that no error has been made to appear. See Miami Typographical Union No. 430 v. Ormerod, Fla., 61 So.2d 753, 754, and cases therein cited.

Affirmed.

MATHEWS, C. J., and TERRELL, SEBRING and HOBSON, JJ., concur. DREW, J., dissents. THOMAS and ROBERTS, JJ., not participating.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

79 So. 2d 687, 1955 Fla. LEXIS 3453, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hotel-restaurant-employees-bartenders-local-union-no-104-v-chambers-fla-1955.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack