McCaskill Investment Co. v. Bank of Thomasville

Supreme Court of Florida

McCaskill Investment Co. v. Bank of Thomasville

139 So. 896, 104 Fla. 300

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided February 19, 1932·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

—This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record and the decree herein and the brief and argument of counsel *301 for the appellant 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 is no error in the decree. It is therefore considered, ordered, and decreed by the court that the said decree of the Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Buford, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, 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 upon the transcript of the record and the decree herein and the brief and argument of counsel *301 for the appellant 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 is no error in the decree. It is therefore considered, ordered, and decreed by the court that the said decree of the Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Buford, C.J., and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur.

McCaskill Investment Co. v. Bank of Thomasville, 139 So. 896, 104 Fla. 300 (Fla. 1932).

Pincite

139 So. 896 (McCaskill Investment Co. v. Bank of Thomasville) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.