Case Name: John Wilkins Sawyer, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation of Lake County, Florida, Appellees; Charles L. Stokley, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation of Lake County, Florida, Appellee; Delts M. Stokley, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation, Appellee
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1933-02-24
Citations: 108 Fla. 456
Docket Number: 
Parties: John Wilkins Sawyer, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation of Lake County, Florida, Appellees. Charles L. Stokley, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation of Lake County, Florida, Appellee. Delts M. Stokley, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 108
Pages: 456–462

Head Matter:
John Wilkins Sawyer, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation of Lake County, Florida, Appellees. Charles L. Stokley, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation of Lake County, Florida, Appellee. Delts M. Stokley, et al., Appellants, v. Town of Mount Dora, a municipal corporation, Appellee.
146 So. 563.
148 So. 209.
Division, A.
Opinion filed February 24, 1933.
Re-hearing denied May 16, 1933.
Buie & Hippier, for Appellants;
Thomas H. Cooley, for Appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
In these three cases' the Court below overruled motions to dismiss three several bills of complaint brought by the Town of Mount Dora to foreclose certain paving assessments made by the city under authority of Chapter 9298, Acts of 1923, Laws of Florida:. The appeals are taken from the interlocutory orders made denying the several motions' to dismiss. We have consolidated the appeals here in order to dispose of them in one' opinion.
An examination of the several transcripts discloses that the decrees appealed' from must be affirmed upon the authority of Davant v. City of' Brooksville, 107 Fla. 292, 144 Sou. Rep. 666, where a bill of complaint, in substance similar to those here involved, was held good as against a demurrer.
Orders appealed from affirmed in each case.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.