Burdine v. Sewell
Supreme Court of Florida
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION.
Campbell, Circuit Judge
(after stating the facts).
The appellant did not file assignment *of errors. The appellees.have not moved the court to dismiss because of this omission. An examination of the entire record indicates that there is merit in the appeal, and this court will not, ex mero motu, dismiss the appeal because of this technical omission. *■
The appeal is taken from a final decree rendered after consideration of the case upon bill of complaint, answer and testimony. There being no assignment of errors, we will proceed to consider the case as a whole, as shown from the record,…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Reese Howell Co. v. BrownUtah Supreme Court · 1916
- Batchelder v. State Capital BankSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1890
- Gilfillan v. Grier, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Alleghany County1891
- Sewell v. BurdineSupreme Court of Florida · 1920
- Shannon v. City of OmahaNebraska Supreme Court · 1904
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by54 opinions
- Canell v. Arcola Housing Corp.Supreme Court of Florida · 1953
- Hagan v. Sabal Palms, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1966
- Bessemer v. GerstenSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
- Crigger v. Florida Power Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
- J. C. Vereen & Sons, Inc. v. HouserSupreme Court of Florida · 1936
49 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.