R. C. RICKER, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
GULF FERTILIZER COMPANY, A CORPORATION, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
R. C. RICKER, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
GULF FERTILIZER COMPANY, A CORPORATION, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
91 Fla. 250
Florida Supreme Court (1926)
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.
Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Holstun & Son v. Embry, 124 Fla. 554 (Fla. 1936)…e negligence of the person to whom it is intrusted. See So. Cotton Oil Co. v. Anderson, supra; Engleman v. Traeger, 102 Fla. 756, 136 South. Rep. 527. The doctrine rests upon the rule of respondent superior. Herr v. Butler, supra; Warner v. Goding, 91 Fla. 250, 107 South. Rep. 406; Eppinger & Russell Co. v. Trembly, 90 Fla. 145, 106 South. Rep. 879; Anderson v. Southern Cotton Oil Co., 73 Fla. 432, 74 South. Rep. 975, L. R. A. 1917E 715. By parity of reasoning, therefore, an employer, who intrusts a dang…