State of Florida v. City of Hollywood

Supreme Court of Florida

State of Florida v. City of Hollywood

119 So. 397, 97 Fla. 18

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided January 11, 1929·Published

Opinion

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

*19 See opinion in the ease of City of Venice, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee, filed October 23, 1928.

Terrell, C. J. and Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur. Whitfield and Ellis, J. J., dissent

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

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

*19 See opinion in the ease of City of Venice, Appellant, v. State of Florida, Appellee, filed October 23, 1928.

Terrell, C. J. and Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur. Whitfield and Ellis, J. J., dissent

State of Florida v. City of Hollywood, 119 So. 397, 97 Fla. 18 (Fla. 1929).

Pincite

119 So. 397 (State of Florida v. City of Hollywood) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.