Legal Opinion

Carlton v. Florida East Coast Railway Co.

Supreme Court of Florida

Decided July 5, 1928PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Per curiam

The amended declaration herein does not wholly fail to state a cause of action, therefore, the demurrer thereto should have been overruled. Wertz v. Tampa Electric Co., 78 Fla. 405, 83 South. Rep. 270; Peterson v. Oscar Daniels Co., 83 Fla. 29, 90 South. Rep. 621; Pero v. Corley, 87 Fla. 448, 100 South. Rep. 748; Foster v. St. Johns Electric Co., 86 Fla. 338, 98 South. Rep. 75; McDonald v. Exchange Supply Co., 88 Fla. 80, 101 South. Rep. 28; Cummings Mach. Works v. Clark, 89 Fla. 383, 105 South. Rep. 100; Hawkins v. Shore Acres Properties, 93 Fla. 670, 112 South. Rep. 61; Yon v. Pinellas…

2Cases cited9 opinions

  1. Peterson v. Oscar Daniels Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1922
  2. Wertz v. Tampa Electric Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1919
  3. McDonald v. Exchange Supply Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1924
  4. State v. AllenSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1924
  5. Cummings Machine Works v. ClarkSupreme Court of Florida · 1925

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

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Greene v. Miller Et Ux.Supreme Court of Florida · 1931
  2. Boyle v. DolanSupreme Court of Florida · 1929
  3. Hammontree v. City of TampaSupreme Court of Florida · 1933
  4. Gregg Corp. v. BurdineSupreme Court of Florida · 1930

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

Powered by the Exa API