Home/Supreme Court of Florida/State Ex Rel. Brosnaham v. Cone

State Ex Rel. Brosnaham v. Cone

196 So. 869, 143 Fla. 4, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1149
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedMay 17, 1940
StatusPublished

This text of 196 So. 869 (State Ex Rel. Brosnaham v. Cone) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
State Ex Rel. Brosnaham v. Cone, 196 So. 869, 143 Fla. 4, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1149 (Fla. 1940).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

The record and the briefs in this case have been examined. Two questions are argued but in their last analysis we see nothing but an urge to recede from our opinion in State ex rel. Proctor, et al., v. Cone, et al., 141 Fla. 606, 193 So. 753, and make a special rule for Escambia County. We are not convinced that this should be done so the motion to strike replication is granted and the motion and demurrer to the answer are overruled.

It is so ordered.

Terrell, C. J., Whitfield, P. J., Buford, Chapman, and Thomas, J. J., concur. Brown, J., not participating.

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

Related

State Ex Rel. Proctor v. Cone
193 So. 753 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1940)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
196 So. 869, 143 Fla. 4, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1149, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-ex-rel-brosnaham-v-cone-fla-1940.