Legal Opinion

Fairlamb v. Fairlamb

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided June 22, 1945PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

BUFORD, J.:

This case is before us on petition to review the interlocutory order which we shall quote later. The bill alleged that plaintiff had been a bona fide resident of Pinellas County for ninety days. This was denied in the answer. So the question was properly raised. Aldrich v. Aldrich, 153 Fla. 856, 16 So. (2nd) 47; Rollins v. Rollins, 155 Fla. 562, 19 So. (2nd) 562.

Testimony was taken on the issue of residence pursuant to Sec. 63.33 (2) Florida Statutes 1941 (same F.S.A.) and the Court entered the order, challenged by this petition, as follows:

“The foregoing cause coming on to be…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Phillips v. PhillipsSupreme Court of Florida · 1941
  2. Mills v. MillsSupreme Court of Florida · 1943
  3. Rollins v. RollinsSupreme Court of Florida · 1944
  4. Taylor v. TaylorSupreme Court of Florida · 1938
  5. Gilhart v. GilhartSupreme Court of Florida · 1945

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

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Garfield v. GarfieldSupreme Court of Florida · 1952
  2. Yost v. YostNebraska Supreme Court · 1955
  3. Camp v. CampNew York Supreme Court · 1959
  4. Smith v. SmithNew York Supreme Court · 1947
  5. Jones v. Jones, Circuit Court of the 15th Judicial Circuit of Florida, Palm Beach County1955

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

Powered by the Exa API