Case ID: fla_106/html/0294-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam. Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Armour Fertilizer Works, a corporation, Appellant, vs. Manda Burney, Wm. Burney and Jake Burney, Appellees.
    
    143 So. 250.
    Division B.
    Decision filed July 26, 1932.
    Petition for rehearing denied August 31, 1932.
    
      
      Cassells c& Tynlde, for Appellant;
    
      Zewadshi <& Pierce, for Appellees.
   Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore -been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and decreed by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, P. J., and Terrell and Davis, J. J., concur.

On Rehearing.

Per Curiam.

In affirming the decree without opinion, the holding was that the injunction granted was properly made perpetual and the sheriff’s deed dated November 10, 1927, was properly vacated, set aside and declared null and void, because the deed in issue was so indefinite as to be void, two defendants being named in the execution whereas the deed only purported to convey the interest of the “defendant” without specification as to the exact interest levied on or intended to be conveyed. This finding was sufficient to require affirmance of the decree, which is conclusive of no other question than the invalidity of the deed attacked and set aside.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Whitfield, P.J., and Terrell and Davis, J. J., concur.