Nelson Et Ux. v. Hodgkins

116 So. 792, 95 Fla. 863
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided May 4, 1928·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judg *864 ment 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 Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

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

Nelson Et Ux. v. Hodgkins, 116 So. 792, 95 Fla. 863 (Fla. 1928).

116 So. 792 (Nelson Et Ux. v. Hodgkins) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Jones v. Hodgkins
26 S.W.2d 19 (Court of Appeals of Kentucky (pre-1976), 1930)