Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

107 Fla. 194

144 So 392

Bailey v. Newman

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided November 8, 1932

Supreme Court of Florida · decided 1932-11-08

Cited by 1 later decisions — most recently September 1933

1 state decisions

Relies on Roberts Bros. v. Langford · Fagg Mill Work & Lumber Co. v. Greer · Catlett Et Ux. v. White Et Ux.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1932-11-08

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Per Curiam.

¶1 Upon a motion to dismiss this appeal because it is frivolous, and subject to being quashed under Section 4639 C. G. L., 2920 R. G. S., the Court has been compelled to read and consider the briefs and record in the case.

¶2 From such examination of the briefs on the merits, which have all been filed, and from our inspection of the transcript of the record, the Court has reached the conclusion that the decree of foreclosure appealed from must inevitably be affirmed on the authority of Fagg Mill Work & Lbr. Co. v. Greer, 102 Fla. 955, 136 Sou. Rep. 679; Catlett v. White, 102 Fla. 110, 135 Sou. Rep. 565.

¶3 Therefore the motion to quash the appeal as frivolous is denied and the decree appealed from is affirmed on the authority of Grand Lodge K. of P. v. Goodall, decided at the present term, and Roberts Bros. v. Langford, 99 Fla. 1268, 128 Sou. Rep. 810.

¶4 Motion to quash appeal as frivolous denied and decree affirmed.

Whitfield, P.J. and Terrell and Davis, J.J., concur. Buford, C.J. and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
/107/fla/194 · .json · Public domain