MANGUM

v.

BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF BREVARD COUNTY

Citator

Cited By

• Middleton v. State, 426 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 1982)
  …t the recollection was then sufficiently fresh to correctly express it. Volusia County Bank v. Bigelow, 45 Fla. 638, 646, 33 So. 704, 706 (1903); See also Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Nobles, 202 So. 2d 603 (Fla. 1st DCA 1967), cert. denied, 210 So. 2d 225 (Fla.1968); King v. Califano, 183 So. 2d 719 (Fla. 1st DCA 1966). We conclude that the stenographer’s testimony was proper not based on the theory of refreshed memory, but rather on the theory that his transcription was a recording of the statement…
• Great Atl. & Pac. TEA Co. v. Mauldin, 218 So. 2d 210 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969)
  …an almost identical case” that the plaintiff has a “ ‘double barrel’ claim.” The decision in question is Great Atlantic & Pacific Tea Co. v. Nobles, 202 So. 2d 603 (1967), certiorari denied without opinion by the Florida Supreme Court as reported in 210 So. 2d 225 (1968). It is true that the factual situation involved in the Nobles case, supra, and that here are comparable in many respects, but the judicial problem which we confronted in that case was very different from that before us in the case at bar. In…

Authorities Cited

• Mangum v. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs of Brevard Cnty., 202 So. 2d 207 (Fla. 4th DCA 1967)