Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

313 So. 2d 117

Docket No. W-318.

Knee v. Smith

Jerrold KNEE, As Trustee, Appellant, v. J. Pierce SMITH, As Tax Assessor of Alachua County, Florida, Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided June 2, 1975.

Rehearing Denied June 20, 1975.

District Court of Appeal of Florida · decided 1975-06-02

Relies on 229 So. 2d 833 - City of Gainesville v. Thomas · 220 So. 2d 644 - Thomas v. City of Gainesville · 223 So. 2d 802 - Mills v. Avon Park Motor Co.

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1975-06-02

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 2010

6 state decisions

3019751980199020002010decided

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 →

¶1Jerrold Knee, of Salter, Yeslow & Burnstein, Hollywood, for appellant.

¶2Norman J. LaCoe, Gainesville, for appellee.

¶3PER CURIAM.

¶4This is an appeal from an Order denying appellant's motion for rehearing and amendment to complaint after summary judgment had been entered in appellee's favor in a suit brought by appellant contesting *118 the refusal of appellee to grant an agricultural assessment to appellant's land.

¶5Although the notice of appeal in this cause bears a filing date of one day in excess of the jurisdictional 30 day period, it appears from the affidavits submitted to this Court that the Clerk's office actually received the notice of appeal within the 30 day jurisdictional period. We thus accept jurisdiction of this cause under the authority of Thomas v. City of Gainesville, 220 So.2d 644 (Fla.App.1st, 1969), affirmed at 229 So.2d 833 (Fla. 1969), and Mills v. Avon Park Motor Company, 223 So.2d 802 (Fla.App.2nd, 1969).

¶6We have heard oral argument in this cause and have carefully examined the record on appeal and the briefs submitted by the parties. Upon our consideration thereof, we conclude that appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error in the proceedings below. The Order appealed herein is affirmed.

¶7RAWLS, C.J., and JOHNSON and MILLS, JJ., concur.

/313/so2d/117 · .json · Public domain