LAWTIS DONALD RHODEN, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1972-01-06
No. 70-693
REED, C. J., and WALDEN and OWEN, JJ., concur.
256 So. 2d 237 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1972) Caution
Cited by 3 cases

Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

On the basis of the briefs and the record, we hold that appellant has not made error appear. The judgment appealed from is, therefore, affirmed.

Affirmed.

REED, C. J., and WALDEN and OWEN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Cohodas v. Russell, 289 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 2d DCA 1974)
    …ar in part payment balance due” on a 'described lot “and $999.00 cash.” The Supreme Court held this to be a sufficient recitation of the terms of payment as to comply with the Statute of Frauds. On the other hand, in Carnes v. Harris, Fla.App.1972, 256 So. 2d 237, the written memorandum consisted of a receipt for $400.00 “for deposits as down payment” on a described lot with “balance due $800.00 by 1 July 1970.” The court held that the receipt was not sufficiently definite to meet the requirements of the Sta…
  • Lerner v. Seymour Litwin, 442 So. 2d 229 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
    …PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Carnes v. Harris, 256 So. 2d 237 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972).…

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw