D. BOYD, APPELLANT,
v.
MUTUAL BENEFIT HEALTH AND ACCIDENT ASSOCIATION, ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court denied a petition for interlocutory certiorari, affirming a lower court's order that denied a motion to dismiss a bill of interpleader and enjoined a related lawsuit. The court found the bill of interpleader's allegations sufficient.
Yes, the allegations in the bill of interpleader were sufficient. The court denied the petition for certiorari.
“On authority of our opinion and judgment in the case' of C. A. Stephens, et al., v. C. R. Stickel, etc., filed at this term of court we shall consider the entry <pf appeal and the lodging of the record here as an application for interlocutory certiorari under Rule 3.”
This quote establishes the procedural posture of the case as an interlocutory certiorari review.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff insurance company filed a bill of interpleader, which the defendants moved to dismiss. The lower court denied this motion and enjoined a…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Interlocutory Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
On authority of our opinion and judgment in the case' of C. A. Stephens, et al., v. C. R. Stickel, etc., filed at this term of court we shall consider the entry <pf appeal and the lodging of the record here as an application for interlocutory certiorari under Rule 3.
*16The order to be reviewed denied motion to dismiss bill of. interpleader, required interpleader between the respondents and enjoined the progress of a suit prosecuted by one of the respondents against the plaintiff insurance company.
The allegations of the bill of complaint .are sufficient to meet the requirements in such cases. New York Life Ins. Co. v. Cancroft, 122 Fla. 10, 164 So. 516.
Certiorari, is denied and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
So ordered.
Brown, C. J., Whitfield, Buford and Adams, J. J., concur.