Legal Opinion

Hunter v. Kearley

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided November 24, 1944PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

THOMAS, J.:

Appellants are aggrieved by the action of the chancellor in denying a motion to amend their bill of complaint after mandate of this Court issued pursuant to the opinion in Kearley, et al., v. Hunter, et al., (Fla.) 16 So. 2nd 728. To decide the point now presented we need only to quote the concluding two sentences of that' decision: “The cause is remanded, with directions to dismiss the bill of complaint. It is so ordered.”

It was the duty of this Court “to reverse or affirm” or “give such . . . decree as the court below should have given . . . .” Sec. 59.34, Florida Statutes, 1941,…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Palm Beach Estates v. CrokerSupreme Court of Florida · 1932
  2. State Ex Rel. the Dowling Co. v. ParksSupreme Court of Florida · 1930
  3. Kearley v. HunterSupreme Court of Florida · 1944

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Berger v. LeposkySupreme Court of Florida · 1958
  2. Martin v. CaseDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1970
  3. Leposky v. BergerSupreme Court of Florida · 1959

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

Powered by the Exa API