Mendelsohn v. Isaac, Et Ux.

116 So. 474, 95 Fla. 144
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided February 13, 1928·Published·Cited by 1 cases

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

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

116 So. 474 (Mendelsohn v. Isaac, Et Ux.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

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