Merritt v. Unkefer

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Merritt v. Unkefer

215 So. 2d 104

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 18, 1968

DocketNo. 2055

StatusPublished

This text of 215 So. 2d 104 (Merritt v. Unkefer) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Merritt v. Unkefer, 215 So. 2d 104 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

It appears that on May 8, 1968, the court denied the motions to dismiss filed by ap-

pellees, Unkefer and Hunt Construction Company, Inc., for the reason that mo-vants had failed to furnish an adequate record, namely, the amended counterclaim, whereby this court could assay the merits of said motion by examining the number of counts and the content of the counterclaim. Said appellees have renewed their motion and now with sufficient record same should be granted upon authority of Midstate Hauling Company, Inc. v. Mutual Insurance Company, Fla.App. 1966, 189 So. 2d 826. Therefore, it is

Ordered that appellant’s motion to strike, filed September 26, 1968, is hereby denied; further, ordered that motions to dismiss filed by Appellee-Unkefer and Appellee-Hunt Construction Company, Inc. on September 13, 1968, are hereby granted and this appeal commenced by notice filed March 22, 1968, in Case No. 60319 of the Circuit Court for Orange County, Murray W. Overstreet, Judge, is hereby dismissed.

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

PER CURIAM.

It appears that on May 8, 1968, the court denied the motions to dismiss filed by ap-

pellees, Unkefer and Hunt Construction Company, Inc., for the reason that mo-vants had failed to furnish an adequate record, namely, the amended counterclaim, whereby this court could assay the merits of said motion by examining the number of counts and the content of the counterclaim. Said appellees have renewed their motion and now with sufficient record same should be granted upon authority of Midstate Hauling Company, Inc. v. Mutual Insurance Company, Fla.App. 1966, 189 So. 2d 826. Therefore, it is

Ordered that appellant’s motion to strike, filed September 26, 1968, is hereby denied; further, ordered that motions to dismiss filed by Appellee-Unkefer and Appellee-Hunt Construction Company, Inc. on September 13, 1968, are hereby granted and this appeal commenced by notice filed March 22, 1968, in Case No. 60319 of the Circuit Court for Orange County, Murray W. Overstreet, Judge, is hereby dismissed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

215 So. 2d 104, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/merritt-v-unkefer-fladistctapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack