-
62 Fla. 419 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1911
Whitfield, C. J. — This writ of error was taken under the statute to an order granting a new trial in an action at law. The only matter for determination is the alleged error in granting the new trial. A motion for new trial is addressed to the sound judicial
-
603 So. 2d 509 Supreme Court of Florida September 3, 1992 No. 78916
PER CURIAM. Upon the authority of Scates v. State, 603 So.2d 504 (Fla.1992), we quash State v. Jenkins, 591 So.2d 261 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991), and remand with directions to reinstate Jenkins’ probation. It is so ordered. BARKETT, C.J., and OVERTON, SHAW and KOGAN
-
117 So. 3d 943 Supreme Court of Florida July 3, 2013 No. SC12-323
LABARGA, J. This case is before the Court for review of a question of Florida law certified by the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit that is determinative of a cause pending in that court and for which that court has indicated there appears
-
44 Fla. 846 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1902Not cited
Decision Per Curiam.
-
45 Fla. 681 Supreme Court of Florida January 15, 1903Not cited
Decision Per Curiam. This action was brought by the defendants in error .-against the plaintiff in. error. There was judgment for the plaintiffs, and the defendant takes writ of error. The judgment is affirmed.
-
45 Fla. 684 Supreme Court of Florida January 15, 1903Not cited
Decision Per Curiam. This action was brought by the' defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. There was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant takes writ of error. The judgment is affirmed.
-
45 Fla. 684 Supreme Court of Florida January 15, 1903Not cited
Decision Per Curiam. The bill in this cause was filed by the appellant against the appellee. There was decree for the defendant, and the complainant appeals. The decree is affirmed.
-
45 Fla. 689 Supreme Court of Florida January 15, 1903Not cited
Decision Per Curiam. This action was brought by the defendant in error against the plaintiff in error. There was judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant takes writ of error. Tl judgment is affirmed.
-
51 Fla. 51 Supreme Court of Florida January 15, 1906
Parkhidl, J. On the 11th day of July, A. D. 1905, the County Solicitor in and for Orange county filed an information in the Criminal Court of Record of that county against the plaintiff in error, Ross Lamps, who will hereafter be called the defendant. The defendant
-
51 Fla. 141 Supreme Court of Florida January 15, 1906
Cockrell, J. Upon petition to a justice of this court a writ of Habeas Corpus was granted returnable before the court. We have serious doubts whether any issues are presented on the pleadings that call for a decision from us in this form of procedure, but the
-
52 Fla. 369 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1906
Cockrell, J.: In an action begun June 20, 1904, Rush sued Moore in assumpsit upon the common counts, the defendant pleading among other pleas the statute of limitations, to which the general replication was filed. At the trial the plaintiff out of his own mouth
-
52 Fla. 565 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1906
Taylor, J. (after stating the facts) : The following principles of law are involved in this case and are well settled by the authorities: Where a party goes into chancery after a trial at law he must be able to impeach the justice and equity of the verdict,
-
55 Fla. 340 Supreme Court of Florida January 15, 1908
Per Curiam. —The plaintiff in error brought an action of assumpsit against the defendant in error in the circuit court for Jackson county. A trial was had which resulted in a verdict in favor of the defendant. Thereupon the following judgment was entered: “We
-
56 Fla. 215 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1908
Cockrell, J. This is a writ of error directed to the granting of a new trial. The plaintiffs declared upon common counts and upon a count for trees cut by them for the defendant at his request. The pleas were payment and that the plaintiffs cut “2385 saw logs
-
56 Fla. 246 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1908
Parkhill, J. The defendants in error, hereinafter to be called the plaintiffs, sued the plaintiff in error, hereinafter to be called the defendant, in the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County to enforce the payment of an insurance policy issued by the defendant
-
56 Fla. 306 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1908
Per Curiam: This case was brought here by writ of error returnable to the 20th day 'of March, 1908, from the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County. Upon taking the same up for final adjudication the court finds that no .properly certified transcript of the record
-
56 Fla. 422 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1908Cited by 7 Concurrence · Hocker
Hocker, J., concurs). —The city council of Pensacola is given power bo pass, for the government of the city, any ordinance not in conflict with the constitution of the United States, the constitution of Florida, and statutes thereof. § 18, Chapter 4513, Acts
-
56 Fla. 670 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1908Cited by 21 Dissent · Taylor
Taylor, J., (Dissenting.) — I am unable to agree to the conclusion reached in the opinion prepared by the Chief Justice in this -case for the following reasons, briefly stated: Our constitution clothes our railroad commission with judicial powers, and the statute
-
540 So. 2d 820 Supreme Court of Florida March 9, 1989 No. 73796Not cited
EHRLICH, Chief Justice. Under the provisions of article V, section 9, of the Florida Constitution, it is the responsibility of the Florida Supreme Court to determine the necessity of increasing or decreasing the number of judges required to effectively and efficiently
-
60 Fla. 78 Supreme Court of Florida June 15, 1910
Shackleford, J. In taking up this case for consideration we find that the record discloses the fact that issue was joined between the parties, a jury empanelled and a *79 trial entered upon, during the course of which the plaintiff announced that by reason of
Showing the top 500 cases. Narrow your search or add filters to see more.