Kramer v. Freedman

295 So. 2d 97, 1973 Fla. LEXIS 3960
Louisiana Court of Appeal·Decided October 10, 1973·No. No. 43442·Published·Cited by 9 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ and have heard argument of the parties. Upon further consideration of the matter, we have determined that the cited decisions present no direct conflict as required by Article V, Section 3(b)(3), Florida Constitution, F.S.A. Therefore, the writ must be and is hereby discharged.

It is so ordered.

CARLTON, C. J., AND ERVIN, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

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

Kramer v. Freedman, 295 So. 2d 97, 1973 Fla. LEXIS 3960 (La. Ct. App. 1973).

295 So. 2d 97 (Kramer v. Freedman) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Solon v. Slater
Supreme Court of Connecticut, 2023
Klem v. ESPEJO-NORTON
983 So. 2d 1235 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2008)
Espejo-Norton v. Merry
869 So. 2d 1255 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2004)
Shakarian v. Daum
561 So. 2d 1222 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Bergman v. Serns
560 So. 2d 1201 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)
Abreu v. Amaro
534 So. 2d 771 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1988)
Freedman v. Horton, Schwartz & Perse
383 So. 2d 659 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1980)