Signer v. Odell
176 So. 2d 94, 1965 Fla. LEXIS 3187
Opinions
Initial inspection suggested that the decision under review, Odell et al. v. Signer et al., 169 So.2d 851, was prima facie in •conflict with prior decisions of this Court and another District Court. We granted •certiorari to hear arguments on both juris- • diction and merits
After oral arguments and a careful further study of the record and briefs we have •decided that no jurisdictional conflict of •decisions is present. We therefore conclude 'that the writ was improvidently issued and :it must be discharged.
It is so ordered.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Signer v. Odell, 176 So. 2d 94, 1965 Fla. LEXIS 3187 (Fla. 1965).
176 So. 2d 94 (Signer v. Odell) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Shaw v. North American Title Co.
876 P.2d 1291 (Hawaii Supreme Court, 1994)
David H. Stuart and Richard A. Whitaker v. Richard G. Spademan
772 F.2d 1185 (Fifth Circuit, 1985)
Rollins Nursing Home, Inc. v. M & LC/Stillwell Mortgage Co.
593 S.W.2d 1 (Supreme Court of Arkansas, 1979)
Frank C. Uible v. Beverly W. Landstreet, III
392 F.2d 467 (Fifth Circuit, 1968)
Boulevard Nat. Bank of Miami v. Air Metals Indus., Inc.
176 So. 2d 94 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1965)