TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

George Caplan, Solomon Caplan and Albert Caplan -Cross v. Clint Johnson, Hazel Johnson v. Underwriters at Lloyds, London, Garnishee- -Cross

George Caplan, Solomon Caplan and Albert Caplan, Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross v. Clint Johnson, Hazel Johnson v. Underwriters at Lloyds, London, Garnishee-Appellant-Cross

George Caplan, Solomon Caplan & Albert Caplan -Cross v. Clint Johnson, Hazel Johnson v. Underwriters at Lloyds, London, Garnishee- -Cross, 417 F.2d 781 (5th Cir. 1969)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
October 7, 1969
Docket
No. 27147
Citations
417 F.2d 7811969 U.S. App. LEXIS 10530

Opinion

417 F.2d 781

George CAPLAN, Solomon Caplan and Albert Caplan, Plaintiffs-Appellees-Cross Appellants, v. Clint JOHNSON, Hazel Johnson, et al., Defendants, v. UNDERWRITERS AT LLOYDS, LONDON, Garnishee-Appellant-Cross Appellee.

No. 27147.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

October 7, 1969.

B. E. Hendricks, Miami, Fla., Edward B. Hayes, Lord, Bissell & Brook, Chicago, Ill., Hendricks & Hendricks, Miami, Fla., for appellants-cross-appellees.

Paul C. Huck, Miami, Fla., William S. Frates, Larry S. Stewart, Frates, Fay, Floyd & Pearson, Miami, Fla., for appellees-cross-appellants.

Before BELL, AINSWORTH and GODBOLD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

1

On due consideration of the petition of Underwriters at Lloyds, London, appellants and cross appellees, for a rehearing of this Court's order of August 14, 1969 denying their petition for rehearing, and of the objection of George Caplan, Solomon Caplan and Albert Caplan, appellees, to the filing of said petition for rehearing, the petition for rehearing is hereby denied.

2

On consideration of the motion of George Caplan, Solomon Caplan and Albert Caplan, appellees, that the Court award reasonable attorney's fees, pursuant to Florida Statute § 627.0127, F.S.A., for services in defending this appeal and for briefing the same in this Court, and of the memorandum of Underwriters at Lloyds, London, appellants, in opposition thereto, the motion is hereby granted and the Court fixes the additional attorney's fees due for services in this Court at the sum of $1,500.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Caplan v. Johnson, 417 F.2d 781 (5th Cir. 1969) 3

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list