Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

529 F.2d 1297

Docket No. 75-1010.

Goldtrap v. Conner

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals

Decided April 7, 1976.

Rehearing and Rehearing En Banc Denied May 10, 1976.

Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals · decided 1976-04-07

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently February 1981

5 federal appellate ·

3 counsel of record

Relies on 391 F. Supp. 124 - Amchem Products, Inc. v. GAF CORPORATION · Jack's Fruit Co. v. Growers Marketing Service, Inc. · 249 So. 2d 486 - Growers Marketing Service, Inc. v. Conner

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Opinion by (per_curiam) · Decided 1976-04-07

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

¶1Robert A. Chastain, Gen. Counsel, State of Fla., Dept, of Agriculture & Consumer Services, Tallahassee, Fla., for Doyle Conner and others.

¶2Britt Whitaker, Tampa, Fla., for Jack Goldtrap.

¶3Robert L. Trohn, Lakeland, Fla., for Growers Marketing Service.

¶4Before BROWN, Chief Judge, TUT-TLE and GEE, Circuit Judges.

¶5PER CURIAM:

¶6This case, which has been much litigated in the Florida Courts, Growers Marketing Service, Inc. v. Conner, Fla.Dist.Ct.App., 1971, 249 So.2d 486; Jack’s Fruit Co. v. Growers Marketing Service, Inc., Fla., 1972, 261 So.2d 171, makes its second appearance in this Court, Jack’s Fruit Company v. Growers Marketing Service, Inc., 5 Cir., 1973, 488 F.2d 493. The arguments conclusively show that the District Court had no jurisdiction in this case and accordingly the judgment entered is vacated and the case remand*1298ed to the District Court with direction to dismiss for want of jurisdiction.1

¶7VACATED and REMANDED with directions to dismiss.

/529/f2d/1297 · .json · Public domain