London v. Marion Mortgage Co.

Supreme Court of Florida

London v. Marion Mortgage Co.

130 So. 762, 100 Fla. 1171

DecidedNovember 8, 1930

StatusPublished

This text of 130 So. 762 (London v. Marion Mortgage 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

London v. Marion Mortgage Co., 130 So. 762, 100 Fla. 1171 (Fla. 1930).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court up'on the transcript of the record of the order and decree herein, and briefs and arguments of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there was no error in the order of May 16, A. D. 1929, overruling the exceptions to the master’s report and denying the defendant’s motion for an order of recommitment, nor in the final decree of the court made and' *1172 entered on the 29th day of May, 1929, with the exception that there should be deducted from the total amount thereby found and decreed to be due on the mortgage debt to the complainant the sum of $288.63, which amount the court below is hereby directed by appropriate amendment to eliminate from the total amount found to be due in said final decree; and the said final decree, when so corrected, and also the said order appealed from herein, will both stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Brown and Bueord, J. J., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court up'on the transcript of the record of the order and decree herein, and briefs and arguments of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there was no error in the order of May 16, A. D. 1929, overruling the exceptions to the master’s report and denying the defendant’s motion for an order of recommitment, nor in the final decree of the court made and' *1172 entered on the 29th day of May, 1929, with the exception that there should be deducted from the total amount thereby found and decreed to be due on the mortgage debt to the complainant the sum of $288.63, which amount the court below is hereby directed by appropriate amendment to eliminate from the total amount found to be due in said final decree; and the said final decree, when so corrected, and also the said order appealed from herein, will both stand affirmed.

Affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Brown and Bueord, J. J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

130 So. 762, 100 Fla. 1171, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/london-v-marion-mortgage-co-fla-1930.