Legal Opinion

Williams v. Pitt

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided June 15, 1896PublishedCited by 8 opinions

Motion by defendants in error to quash writ of error and to dismiss the cause.

1Opinion of the Court

Liddon, J.:

The grounds of the motion insisted upon are: 1st. The said writ of error is not tested in the name of the Chief-Justice of this court as required by law. 3d. No copy of the transcript of the record has been served upon defendants in error, or their attorneys, or either of them, as required by the rules of this court. 4th. No abstract of the record has been served upon the defendants in error, or their attorneys, or either of them, as required by the rules of this court. 5th. The paper writings contained in the record purporting to be bills of exceptions are not in conformity with…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Heidenheimer v. ThomasTexas Supreme Court · 1885
  2. Poyntz v. ReynoldsSupreme Court of Florida · 1896
  3. Allen v. LewisSupreme Court of Florida · 1896
  4. Steele v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1894

3Cited by8 opinions

  1. Reed v. State of FloridaSupreme Court of Florida · 1927
  2. Palmer v. Johnson Const. Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1929
  3. Montgomery v. StateSupreme Court of Florida · 1907
  4. State Ex Rel. Globe & Rutgers Fire Insurance v. CorneliusSupreme Court of Florida · 1930
  5. Esch v. ForsterSupreme Court of Florida · 1930

3 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