Legal Opinion
Bischoff v. Walker
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided February 8, 2013No. 5D11-2194PublishedCited by 4 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ON MOTION FOR REHEARING
SAWAYA, J.
Appellee has filed a motion for rehearing stating that he “does not contest the *1166court’s analysis with respect to the canal.” He does contend, however, that summary judgment in Bischoffs favor regarding the land underlying the pertinent part of the lake bordering her property is inappropriate because material issues of fact and law exist that are not yet resolved. After further review, we conclude that material issues of fact and law exist regarding Bis-choffs claim in Count II of her second amended complaint concerning her ownership of the lands under the…
2Cases cited16 opinions
- Smith v. HornSupreme Court of Florida · 1915
- Coumas v. Transcontinental Garage, Inc.Wyoming Supreme Court · 1951
- Glover v. GiraldoWyoming Supreme Court · 1992
- Wilson v. Lucerne Canal and Power Co.Wyoming Supreme Court · 2007
- Jacksonville, Tampa & Key West Railway Co. v. LockwoodSupreme Court of Florida · 1894
11 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by4 opinions
- Castillo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- Castillo v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2020
- Castillo v. United StatesUnited States Court of Federal Claims · 2023
- Red Boot Production Company, Inc., Barbara Landrum, Widow of Claude John Landrum, Eric Landrum, Matthew Wayne Landrum, Scott Michael Landrum, Dawn Ewing Mills, Tamara Ewing, Sean Ewing, Laura Ewing, J. Patrick Morris Sr., Joseph J. Morris v. Samson Exploration, LLC and SM Energy Company F/K/A St. Mary Land & Exploration Company, Texas Court of Appeals, 9th District (Beaumont)2015