Mather v. Fla. Nat. Bank of Jacksonville

Supreme Court of Florida

Mather v. Fla. Nat. Bank of Jacksonville

182 So. 301, 132 Fla. 891, 1938 Fla. LEXIS 1849

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedJune 18, 1938

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 182 So. 301 (Mather v. Fla. Nat. Bank of Jacksonville) 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

Mather v. Fla. Nat. Bank of Jacksonville, 182 So. 301, 132 Fla. 891, 1938 Fla. LEXIS 1849 (Fla. 1938).

Pincite

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion made by defendants, appellants here, for a better bill of particulars, and an order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the bill of complaint which had been filed by the appellees. After due hearing and consideration, the Court is of the opinion that the bill was not without equity and that the order of the court below, denying said motion to dismiss should be allowed to stand. Nor was there any re *892 versible error committed in denying the motion for bill of particulars.

As the Court cannot foresee what questions may be presented for decision by further pleadings and proof in this cause in the court -below, the Court deems it unnecessary at this time to discuss and rule upon the questions which have been so ably presented and argued, both orally and by briefs, by counsel for the respective parties, some of which questions may be materially changed or entirely eliminated when the answer is filed and the evidence is taken.

Taking all of the allegations of the amended’bill, which are well presented, as being true, which must be done on motion to dismiss, the bill is not without equity, and the court below should not be reversed for so holding.

The orders appealed from must therefore be and the same hereby are accordingly affirmed.

Whitfield, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.

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

Per Curiam.

This is an appeal from an order denying a motion made by defendants, appellants here, for a better bill of particulars, and an order denying defendants’ motion to dismiss the bill of complaint which had been filed by the appellees. After due hearing and consideration, the Court is of the opinion that the bill was not without equity and that the order of the court below, denying said motion to dismiss should be allowed to stand. Nor was there any re *892 versible error committed in denying the motion for bill of particulars.

As the Court cannot foresee what questions may be presented for decision by further pleadings and proof in this cause in the court -below, the Court deems it unnecessary at this time to discuss and rule upon the questions which have been so ably presented and argued, both orally and by briefs, by counsel for the respective parties, some of which questions may be materially changed or entirely eliminated when the answer is filed and the evidence is taken.

Taking all of the allegations of the amended’bill, which are well presented, as being true, which must be done on motion to dismiss, the bill is not without equity, and the court below should not be reversed for so holding.

The orders appealed from must therefore be and the same hereby are accordingly affirmed.

Whitfield, Brown, Buford and Chapman, J. J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 So. 301, 132 Fla. 891, 1938 Fla. LEXIS 1849, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mather-v-fla-nat-bank-of-jacksonville-fla-1938.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack