Legal Opinion

Milgram v. Lee

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 31, 1967No. 66-565PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Opinion of the Court

SWANN, Judge.

In their brief on appeal, appellants have failed to state any “[s]pecific assignments of error from which the points argued arise.” Rule 3.7 subd. f(4), Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A.; Applefield v. Commercial Standard Insurance Co., Fla.App. 1965, 176 So.2d 366. Appellee has noted this defect in his brief but has not moved to strike appellants’ brief. Without waiving his rights to strike, appellee has answered appellants’ points on appeal. Under these circumstances, we proceed to the merits.

Appellants claim that an improper person was appointed as receiver during the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Farmers Bank & Trust Co. v. Palms Publishing Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1923
  2. Edenfield v. CrispDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1966
  3. Applefield v. Commercial Standard Insurance CompanyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1965
  4. Protective Holding Corp. v. Cornwall Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1936
  5. Bird v. Earle & PerkinsSupreme Court of Florida · 1875

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Ramey v. ThomasDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
  2. Pearlman v. PearlmanDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981

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

Powered by the Exa API