CHALET SUZANNE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
v.
ELAINE DREW, WIDOW OF WILLIAM HENRY DREW, DECEASED, RESPONDENT
CHALET SUZANNE, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, PETITIONER,
ELAINE DREW, WIDOW OF WILLIAM HENRY DREW, DECEASED, RESPONDENT
163 So. 2d 13
Florida District Court of Appeal, Second District (1964)
Caution
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
The petition for writ of certiorari filed in this cause on December 13, 1963, challenges an interlocutory order allegedly dated November 14, 1963, and filed on December 13, 1963. Examination of the transcript accompanying the petition reveals no order of November 14, 1963, and, in fact, reveals that the adjudication challenged was made in an order rendered on October 4, 1963. The latter date being seventy (70) days prior to the filing of the petition for writ of certiorari, the petition is untimely and must be dismissed.
SMITH, C. J., and ALLEN and ANDREWS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Llopis, 257 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 1971)…ommon intelligence are not required to guess at its meaning? The imposition of such liability violates the very fundamental precepts of due process, Locklin v. Pridgeon [158 Fla. 737], 30 So. 2d 102 (Fla.1947) ; Headley v. State [ex rel. Selkowitz], 163 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1964) reh. den.; Headley v. Selkowitz, 171 So. 2d 368 (Fla.1965) reh. den. Webster’s Seventh New Collegiate Dictionary, 1970, at page 537, defines ‘might’ in a variety of terms, among them ‘possibility’ and ‘probability’. “The foregoing consid…
-
Headley v. Selkowitz, 171 So. 2d 368 (Fla. 1965)…trolling about in any place in the City and not being able to give a satisfactory account of himself, or who is without any lawful means of support.” The District Court of Appeal affirmed. See Walter C. Headley v. State ex rel. Selkowitz, Fla.App., 163 So. 2d 13. It said: “ * * * The ordinance in question fails to define the area involved within the municipality; fails to define or limit the time of day it is applicable and, by its broad terms, subjects any citizen (who may be engaged in lawful pursuits) t…
-
Reeves v. State, 187 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)…tted into evidence. The principal thrust of the appellant’s argument as to the validity of the arrest in the first instance is that the ordinance in question has been declared unconstitutional. See: Headley v. State ex rel. Selkowitz, Fla.App.1964, 163 So. 2d 13; Headley v. Selkowitz, Fla.1965, 171 So. 2d 368. We do not agree that the police officers were without the authority to arrest for vagrancy for one or any of the following reasons: (1) The effect of the circuit court order holding the ordinance unco…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence