Sharman v. Bayshore Investment Co.
Supreme Court of Florida
1Opinion of the CourtBuford, J.
In this ease there is but one assignment of error that appears to be meritorious. That assignment is based upon the fact that the Northern Miami Real Estate Corporation was a party to the suit. That no service binding upon such corporation was had; that a decree pro confesso was entered against that corporation without service having been had upon the same, and that therefore, the Court was without jurisdiction to enter such decree pro eonfesso and was without jurisdiction to enter a final decree as long as that corporation stood as a party to the suit and the cause was not at issue as that…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Bannon v. TrammellSupreme Court of Florida · 1928
3Cited by7 opinions
- Smetal Corporation v. West Lake Investment Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1936
- Napoleon B. Broward Drainage District v. Certain LandsSupreme Court of Florida · 1948
- Oates v. Prudential Insurance Co. of AmericaSupreme Court of Florida · 1932
- Waring v. O'DonielSupreme Court of Florida · 1931
- Humphries v. HesterSupreme Court of Florida · 1932
2 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.