Case ID: fla_101/html/0864-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam..", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Edward Hogan, Plaintiff in Error, vs. Louis Loewenkopf, Defendant in Error.
    
    Division B.
    Opinion filed February 11, 1931.
    
      D. C. Campbell, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      Zacharias, Sdbel <& Reinstine, for Defendant in Error.
   Per Curiam..

This cause having heretofore been submitted to' the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment 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 judgment except in this, to-wit: There is not found in the pleadings nor in the proof sufficient basis to support a judgment for attorney’s fees. The record shows that the judgment included the sum of $500.00 for attorney’s fees. If the plaintiff in- the Court below shall within ten days of the filing of the mandate enter a remittitur in the sum. of $500.00, the remainder of the judgment will stand affirmed as of the date the same was originally rendered. Otherwise, the judgment will be reversed. It is so ordered.

Affirmed on remittitur.

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

Strum, C.J., and Ellis and'Brown, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.