CHARLES CREIGHTON, APPELLANT,
v.
C.J. BRANNAN, JR., AND DON SCHAAF, INDIVIDUALLY, AND D/B/A GIBRALTAR OIL & GAS COMPANY, APPELLEES; C.J. BRANNAN, JR., APPELLANT, V. CHARLES CREIGHTON AND CLIFFORD W. TRICE, ET AL., APPELLEES; C.J. BRANNAN, JR., AND DON SCHAAF, APPELLANTS, V. CHARLES CREIGHTON AND CLIFFORD W. TRICE, ET AL., APPELLEES
CHARLES CREIGHTON, APPELLANT,
C.J. BRANNAN, JR., AND DON SCHAAF, INDIVIDUALLY, AND D/B/A GIBRALTAR OIL & GAS COMPANY, APPELLEES; C.J. BRANNAN, JR., APPELLANT, V. CHARLES CREIGHTON AND CLIFFORD W. TRICE, ET AL., APPELLEES; C.J. BRANNAN, JR., AND DON SCHAAF, APPELLANTS, V. CHARLES CREIGHTON AND CLIFFORD W. TRICE, ET AL., APPELLEES
439 So. 2d 342
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1983)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
AFFIRMED.
GLICKSTEIN and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
WALDEN, J., dissents, with opinion.
Dissent
WALDEN, Judge,
dissenting.
In my opinion there was an ambiguity as concerns the written contract. Thus, parole testimony should have been allowed to explain the intent of the parties. I would reverse upon authority of Royal American Rlty. v. Bank of Palm Beach & Tr. Co., 215 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968) and Friedman v. Virginia Metal Products Corp., 56 So. 2d 515 (Fla.1952).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dechaine v. State, 751 So. 2d 100 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…rge for violation of the speedy trial rule. Id. at 1071. Rule 3.140(m), Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, states that an accused shall be furnished a copy of the information and be allowed at least 24 hours to plead to same. In Johnson v. State, 439 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983), the state made a substantive amendment to the charge on the morning of trial. The court interpreted rule 3.140(m)to mean that, despite the running of the speedy trial time, the defendant was entitled to not only 24 hours to plead…
-
Santiago v. State (Fla. 2d DCA 2024)…he new charge, and thus, it follows that the likelihood of prejudice to Mr. Santiago was substantial. Accordingly, the trial court abused its discretion in denying the continuance request based upon the new charge. See, e.g., Johnson v. State, 439 So. 2d 342, 343-44 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983) (holding that the defendant was prejudiced by the State's filing of two amendments of information, which expanded the period of time in which the offense was allegedly committed, two days before trial, reasoning that t…
Authorities Cited
- Arrow Prop. Ins. Adjusters, Inc. v. People's Tr. Ins. Co., 357 So. 3d 182 (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
- Royal Am. Realty, Inc. v. Bank OF Palm Beach & Tr. Co., 215 So. 2d 336 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)