Legal Opinion

Sickler v. Melbourne State Bank

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided February 23, 1935PublishedCited by 14 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtBuford, J.

In this case the Melbourne State Bank sought to foreclose a mortgage on certain lands described therein as follows:

“Lots 29 and 32, in Block 10, on Oak Street, according to the Plat of the City of Melbourne recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court, Brevard County, Florida.”

It is further alleged that the same lands were known and otherwise described, as follows:

“Lots 29 and 32, Block 10 of W. T. Well’s Subdivision of Melbourne, Map No. 3 according to Plat recorded in' Plat Book 1, page 158 of the Public Records of Brevard: County, Florida, said land being in Section 3, Township…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Federal Land Bank of Columbia v. DekleSupreme Court of Florida · 1933
  2. Gradolph v. RicouSupreme Court of Florida · 1932

3Cited by14 opinions

  1. Applefield v. Commercial Standard Insurance CompanyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1965
  2. Carson, Et Vir. v. PalmerSupreme Court of Florida · 1939
  3. Rafkind v. BeerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
  4. Brooks Tropicals, Inc. v. AcostaDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007
  5. Flanigan's Enterprises v. Shoppes at 18thDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2007

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API