Vedder v. Hurst

Supreme Court of Florida

Vedder v. Hurst

192 So. 2d 282

CourtSupreme Court of Florida

DecidedNovember 30, 1966

DocketNo. 35703

StatusPublished

This text of 192 So. 2d 282 (Vedder v. Hurst) 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

Vedder v. Hurst, 192 So. 2d 282 (Fla. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By petition and cross-petition for a writ of certiorari we have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing date July 25, 1966.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petition and cross-petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law.

The petition and cross-petition are therefore denied.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and DREW, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

By petition and cross-petition for a writ of certiorari we have for review an order of the Florida Industrial Commission bearing date July 25, 1966.

We find that oral argument would serve no useful purpose and it is therefore dispensed with pursuant to Florida Appellate Rule 3.10, subd. e, 31 F.S.A.

Our consideration of the petition and cross-petition, the record and briefs leads us to conclude that there has been no deviation from the essential requirements of law.

The petition and cross-petition are therefore denied.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and DREW, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

192 So. 2d 282, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/vedder-v-hurst-fla-1966.