Legal Opinion
Baya v. Revitz
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided March 8, 1977No. 75-1880PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
PEARSON, Judge.
We have been presented with a prior appeal in this matter. See Baya v. Revitz, 281 So.2d 521 (Fla.3d DCA 1973). We determined there that partition was a proper remedy and, as a second reason for an af-firmance, we held:
“Appellee contends that a stipulation in the record of this case was a stipulation of settlement and that therefore the ap*341pellants cannot appeal the consent judgment. We agree. Our examination of the record convinces us that the stipulation was a settlement.”
George and Mary Baya, the defendants‘in the trial court and appellants in that appeal, sought certiorari…
2Cases cited8 opinions
- State, Use and Benefit of Foster v. TurnerMississippi Supreme Court · 1975
- Tellefsen v. Key System Transit LinesCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1961
- Cline v. Flagler Sales Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1968
- Mann v. ThompsonDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1960
- Horn v. HornSupreme Court of Florida · 1954
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Powers v. LenoMassachusetts Appeals Court · 1987
- Della-Donna v. Nova University, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
- Revitz v. BayaSupreme Court of Florida · 1977
- Baya v. RevitzDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978