In re Estate of Rogers

205 So. 2d 535
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided August 3, 1967·No. Nos. 725, 964·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

UPON PETITION FOR CLARIFICATION

PER CURIAM.

Our order of June 30, 1967, struck appellant’s petition for rehearing as not being timely filed in that it was applied for more than fifteen days after the filing of our decision. F.A.R. 3.14(a), 31 F.S.A. By way of clarification or elaboration, it was our purpose and we do hold that the fact that the clerk of our court has transmitted a copy of our opinion on the merits to appellant’s counsel by mail did not extend- the time for appellant to apply for rehearing by three days under the terms of F.A.R. 3.4 (b) (3). Cf. In re Walker’s Trust, Fla.App. 1962, 143 So.2d 363, and Harris v. State, Fla.App.1958, 107 So.2d 402.

WALDEN, C. J., and ANDREWS and CROSS, JJ., concur.

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

In re Estate of Rogers, 205 So. 2d 535 (Fla. Ct. App. 1967).

205 So. 2d 535 (In re Estate of Rogers) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Grabarnick v. Florida Homeowners Ass'n of North Broward
395 So. 2d 1184 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1981)
Franchi v. Florida Dept. of Commerce
375 So. 2d 1154 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1979)