1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. So.2d
  4. 254 So.2d
  5. 254 So.2d 835 (1971)
 

FUTURO PROPERTIES, INC. v. JACKSON'S/BYRONS ENTERPRISES, INC.

No. 71-199.

254 So.2d 835 (1971)

FUTURO PROPERTIES, INC., Appellant, v. JACKSON'S/BYRONS ENTERPRISES, INC., Appellee.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

November 30, 1971.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

Howard R. Hirsch, for appellant.

Knight, Peters, Hoeveler, Pickle, Niemoeller & Flynn, Miami, for appellee.

Before SWANN, C.J., and PEARSON and BARKDULL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

PEARSON, Judge (dissenting).

A dissent to a per curiam affirmance is a singularly unproductive act. Nevertheless, my opinion that this appeal is governed by the rule stated in Mills v. Krauss, Fla.App. 1959, 114 So.2d 817 is so strong that I feel it should be noted. The rule is stated:

"The rule is clear beyond argument that one who undertakes by contract to do for another a given thing...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases