Mendelsohn v. Isaac, Et Ux.

116 So. 474, 95 Fla. 144
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedFebruary 13, 1928
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 116 So. 474 (Mendelsohn v. Isaac, Et Ux.) 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
Mendelsohn v. Isaac, Et Ux., 116 So. 474, 95 Fla. 144 (Fla. 1928).

Opinions

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for *145 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 is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Opinion Filed March 27, 1928. Gilbert G. Robinson, Attorney for Appellant; Shutts Bowen and John S. Benz, Attorneys for Appellees. Ellis, C. J., and Strum and Brown, J. J., concur.

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

Related

American Guaranty Co. v. Sunset Realty & Planting Co.
23 So. 2d 409 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1944)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
116 So. 474, 95 Fla. 144, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mendelsohn-v-isaac-et-ux-fla-1928.