Strouse & Bros. v. Hall

62 Fla. 394
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedJune 15, 1911
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 62 Fla. 394 (Strouse & Bros. v. Hall) 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
Strouse & Bros. v. Hall, 62 Fla. 394 (Fla. 1911).

Opinion

Per Curiam.

— It appears from the transcript that during the trial of the cause the plaintiff announced that on account of a ruling of the court, refusing to admit certain proffered documentary evidence, it would be compelled to take a non-suit. We find nothing in the transcript which even purports to be a final judgment, therefore there is nothing to support a writ of error. See Goldring v. Reid, 60 Fla. 78, 53 South. Rep. 503, where prior decisions of this court will be found cited.

There being no- final judgment, it necessarily follows that the writ of error must be dismissed.

[395]*395Whitfield, C. J., and Shackleford and Cockrell, J. J., concur; Taylor, Hocker and Parkhill, J. J., concur in the opinion.

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

Related

Martin v. Hosmer
124 So. 18 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1929)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
62 Fla. 394, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/strouse-bros-v-hall-fla-1911.