Schubowsky v. Hearn Food Store, Inc.
261 So. 2d 162
Opinions
The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ and have heard argument of the parties. Upon further consideration of the matter we have determined that the cited decisions present no direct conflict as required by Article V, Section 4, Florida Constitution, F.S.A. Therefore, the writ must be and is hereby discharged.
It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Schubowsky v. Hearn Food Store, Inc., 261 So. 2d 162 (Fla. 1972).
261 So. 2d 162 (Schubowsky v. Hearn Food Store, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Layne v. Restaurant Management of Florida, Inc.
666 So. 2d 943 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Alexander v. Allen
538 So. 2d 1372 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1989)
Torres v. Sell
502 So. 2d 521 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Baker v. 7-11 Food Stores, Inc.
282 So. 2d 648 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1973)