Schumacher v. Keck

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Schumacher v. Keck

143 So. 2d 350, 1962 Fla. App. LEXIS 3039

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 20, 1962

DocketNo. 3149

StatusPublished

This text of 143 So. 2d 350 (Schumacher v. Keck) 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

Schumacher v. Keck, 143 So. 2d 350, 1962 Fla. App. LEXIS 3039 (Fla. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Motion to dismiss and to strike was directed to the amended complaint in this equity suit. It is from the order denying the motion that this interlocutory appeal has ensued. A phase of the complaint for relief is predicated upon a writing dated August 28, 1954, addressed “To Whom It May Concern” and signed by W. W. Harsh-man, L. E. Keck, and F. M. Schumacher. We do not think that we should on this interlocutory appeal determine whether the writing so identified constitutes a contract. However, we are of the view that the allegations of the amended complaint contain equity sufficient to withstand the motion attacking it.

Affirmed.

KANNER, Acting C. J., and SMITH and WHITE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Motion to dismiss and to strike was directed to the amended complaint in this equity suit. It is from the order denying the motion that this interlocutory appeal has ensued. A phase of the complaint for relief is predicated upon a writing dated August 28, 1954, addressed “To Whom It May Concern” and signed by W. W. Harsh-man, L. E. Keck, and F. M. Schumacher. We do not think that we should on this interlocutory appeal determine whether the writing so identified constitutes a contract. However, we are of the view that the allegations of the amended complaint contain equity sufficient to withstand the motion attacking it.

Affirmed.

KANNER, Acting C. J., and SMITH and WHITE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

143 So. 2d 350, 1962 Fla. App. LEXIS 3039, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/schumacher-v-keck-fladistctapp-1962.