TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Armstrong Grocer Co. v. Smith-Alford Sign Service, Inc.

Armstrong Grocer Company, a Corporation, Appellant, Plaintiff in Error, vs. Smith-Alford Sign Service, Inc., a Corporation, Defendant in Error. City of Daytona Beach, Florida, a Municipal Corporation, Garnishee

Armstrong Grocer Co. v. Smith-Alford Sign Serv., Inc., 132 So. 696 (Fla. 1931)
Download
Format
Include

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

Court
Supreme Court of Florida · State Highest Courts
Decided
February 5, 1931
Judges
Whitfield, Terrell, Buford
Citations
132 So. 696101 Fla. 668

Opinion of the Court — Per Curiam

Per Curiam.

The judgment in ¡ this case should be affirmed on authority of the opinion and judgment in the case of Tyler vs. Akerman, et al., 85 Fla. 185 , 96 Sou. 838 , and cases there cited. It is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Buford, J.J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

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

1943: 11972: 119432026peak 1943 · 1

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Ake v. Chancey13 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 1943)
  2. Bailey v. Baron269 So. 2d 45 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)

Most recent

  1. Bailey v. Baron269 So. 2d 45 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1972)
  2. Ake v. Chancey13 So. 2d 6 (Fla. 1943)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
Tampa Elec. Co. v. Bazemore, 96 So. 297 (Fla. 1923) 16
Tyler v. Akerman, 96 So. 838 (Fla. 1923) 8

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