CHARLES LORD, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THOMAS J. WATKINS, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
CHARLES LORD, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
THOMAS J. WATKINS, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
84 Fla. 514
Florida Supreme Court (1922)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
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.
All concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hinton Folsom as Tax Collector v. Bank of Greenwood, 97 Fla. 426 (Fla. 1929)…U. S. 440, 17 Sup. Ct. R. 629, 41 L. Ed. 1069; Sunday Lake Iron Co., v. Township of Wakefield, 274 U. S. 350, 38 Sup. Ct. R. 495, 62 L. Ed. 1155; Chicago Great Western Railway Company, 266 U. S. 94, 45 Sup. Ct. R. 55, 69 L. Ed. 183; Lord v. Watkins, 84 Fla. 514, 94 So. R. 160. See also City of Tampa v. Palmer, 89 Fla. 514, 105 So. R. 115; Ger. Am. Lumber Co. v. Barbee, 59 Fla. 494, 78 So. R. 536 ; Wade v. Murrhee, 75 Fla. 494, 78 So. R. 536; King v. Gwynn, 14 Fla. 32. The organic law of this State provide…