JOSEPH OPTNER AND MINNIE OPTNER, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
J. M. KNIGHT AND SARAH L. MARTIN, JOINED BY HER HUSBAND, G. B. MARTIN, AND FRANK SMOAK, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS FRED SMOAK, AND CHARLES F. JOHNSON, DOING BUSINESS AS SMOAK AND JOHNSON, APPELLEES

Fla. | 1929-03-26
Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur.
97 Fla. 390 Florida Supreme Court (1929) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

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

Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Hazen v. Frank A. Smith as Judge of the Cir. Court of the Seventeenth Jud. Cir. of the State of Fla., 101 Fla. 767 (Fla. 1931)
    …does not do so, judgment may be entered and execution may be issued and enforced whether the motion for a new trial remains unisposed of or not. Worrell v. Ford, 83 So. 295; Greeley v. Percival, 21 Fla. 428; Florida Asphalt Block Pav. Co. v. Davis, 97 Fla. 390, 121 So. 461. [*771] While at common law a pending motion for a new trial might have operated as a supersedeas during the term (46 C. J. 304; 34 G. J. 653; Woodward Iron Co. v. Brown, 167 Ala. 316, 52 So. 829) in Florida the statute limits the time…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw