Scanlon v. Litt

192 So. 2d 784
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 14, 1966
DocketNo. 64-978
StatusPublished

This text of 192 So. 2d 784 (Scanlon v. Litt) 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
Scanlon v. Litt, 192 So. 2d 784 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Opinion

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

WHEREAS, the judgment of this court was entered on June 29, 1965 (176 So.2d 557) affirming the summary judgment of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and

WHEREAS, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion and judgment filed November 9, 1966 (191 So.2d 553) and mandate dated November 28, 1966, now lodged in this court, quashed this court’s judgment and remanded the cause for further proceedings consistent with the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida;

NOW, THEREFORE, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court issued in this cause on July 15, 1965 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed on June 29, 1965 is vacated, the said opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court. The summary judgment of the circuit court appealed from is reversed and the cause is remanded for further proceedings in accordance with the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the circuit court (Rule 3.16(b) Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A.).

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

Related

Scanlon v. Litt
176 So. 2d 557 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1965)
Scanlon v. Litt
191 So. 2d 553 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1966)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
192 So. 2d 784, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/scanlon-v-litt-fladistctapp-1966.