Vanvaks v. Chantly

145 So. 838, 107 Fla. 647
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided January 9, 1933·Published·Cited by 7 cases

Opinions

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment 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 judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the. same is hereby affirmed.

Buford, C.J., and Whitfield and Brown, J.J., concur.

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

Vanvaks v. Chantly, 145 So. 838, 107 Fla. 647 (Fla. 1933).

145 So. 838 (Vanvaks v. Chantly) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brown v. Palmer
245 So. 2d 860 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1971)
Brown v. Palmer
233 So. 2d 459 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
Miami Transit Company v. Yellen
22 So. 2d 787 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1945)
Mallory v. Edgar
175 So. 863 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1937)
Winn & Lovett Grocery Co. v. Archer
171 So. 214 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1936)
Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. McRoberts
149 So. 631 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1933)