Opinion · Florida Court Opinions

MONTGOMERY ET AL. v. COLEMAN ET AL., 95 Fla. 389 (1928)

B. MONTGOMERY, A. R. MADDOX & CORA LEE MADDOX, Appellants, v. JAMESCOLEMAN, ET AL., Appellee., 115 So. 846 (Fla. 1928)

Type: Opinion
Court: Florida Court Opinions
Jurisdiction: Florida
Date: 1928-02-29
Topic: general

MONTGOMERY ET AL. v. COLEMAN ET AL., 95 Fla. 389 (1928) 115 So. 846 B. MONTGOMERY, A. R. MADDOX AND CORA LEE MADDOX, Appellants, v.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed MONTGOMERY ET AL. v. COLEMAN ET AL., 95 Fla. 389 (1928). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

MONTGOMERY ET AL. v. COLEMAN ET AL.,95 Fla. 389(1928)

115 So. 846

B. MONTGOMERY, A. R. MADDOX AND CORA LEE MADDOX,Appellants,v. JAMES

COLEMAN, ET AL.,Appellee.

Supreme Court of Florida,

Division B.

Decision Filed February 29, 1928;

Petition for Rehearing Denied March 14, 1928.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard County; W. W. Wright, Judge.

Shepard Wahl,for Appellants;Millard B. Smith,for Appellees.

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 decreed by the Court that the said order of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

WHITFIELD, P. J., AND TERRELL AND BUFORD, J. J., concur.