Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

123 So. 2d 408

Aronson v. Congregation Temple De Hirsch

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1960-06-16

Relies on 118 So. 2d 838 - Wartman v. Wartman

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1960-06-16

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently May 2018

1 district · 6 state decisions

40196019701980199020002010decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

PEARSON, Judge

¶1(dissenting in part).

¶2The appellee has moved to dismiss this appeal on the ground that the final order was rendered April 20, 1959 and the notice of appeal was filed May 28, 1959, which was more than 30 days from the rendition of the final order. The jurisdictional question is properly raised prior to the disposition of the appeal. It is my view that the question should be considered and decided in accordance with the law existing at the time the motion was filed.

¶3I would grant the motion for the reasons set forth in the case of In re Wartman’s Estate, Fla.App. 1960, 118 So.2d 838.

/123/so2d/408 · .json · Public domain