Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

101 So. 2d 413

Chapman v. Slaff

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided February 4, 1958

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1958-02-04

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently September 1978

8 state decisions

Relies on National Turpentine & Pulpwood Corp. v. Mills

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1958-02-04

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Gertrude CHAPMAN, Plaintiff,
v.
Maurice M. SLAFF and Annett H. Slaff, his wife, individually and as Director and Trustees for the property of Slaff Realty Company, Inc., a dissolved Florida corporation, Slaff Realty Company, Inc., a Florida Corporation, and R.A. Gray, as Secretary of the State of Florida, Defendants.

No. A-243.

¶1District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

February 4, 1958.

¶2Horn & Ossinsky, Daytona Beach, for plaintiff.

¶3Alex D. Littlefied, Jr., Joseph Hirschman, Daytona Beach, and Howard S. Bailey, Tallahassee, for defendants.

¶4PER CURIAM.

¶5The question certified to this Court in the above stated cause for an answer is not such a question as falls within Rule 4.6, Florida Appellate Rules, in that our answer, if given, would not be determinative of the cause and for the further reason that there appears to be controlling precedent in this state on which a decision of the Chancellor could be based. The trial court, under Section 6, of Article V of the Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., has the power to adjudicate the question, the answer to which may be reviewed on appeal if desired. See City of Hollywood v. Peck, Fla., 57 So.2d 842.

¶6STURGIS, C.J., and CARROLL and WIGGINTON, JJ., concur.

/101/so2d/413 · .json · Public domain