Thomas v. Imperial Lounge

Supreme Court of Florida

Thomas v. Imperial Lounge

182 So. 2d 420

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedFebruary 2, 1966

DocketNo. 34610

StatusPublished

This text of 182 So. 2d 420 (Thomas v. Imperial Lounge) 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

Thomas v. Imperial Lounge, 182 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We have examined the record and briefs and have heard oral argument. We find that in entering the order under attack the respondent Commission did not depart from the essential requirements of the law. The petition for writ of certiorari is therefore denied.

■ The petition for attorney’s fees is also denied.

It is so ordered.

THORNAL, C. J., O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., and WARREN, Circuit Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We have examined the record and briefs and have heard oral argument. We find that in entering the order under attack the respondent Commission did not depart from the essential requirements of the law. The petition for writ of certiorari is therefore denied.

■ The petition for attorney’s fees is also denied.

It is so ordered.

THORNAL, C. J., O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., and WARREN, Circuit Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 So. 2d 420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/thomas-v-imperial-lounge-fla-1966.