Court Opinion

ID: 7484612
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2022-07-29 04:00:38.974554+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T16:23:02.506009
License: Public Domain

PER CURIAM.
Appellant again assaults this court’s decision in Adams v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad Company, 224 So.2d 797 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969), urging that it is ill reasoned, erroneous and that we should recede therefrom. We have again considered that opinion in the light of the facts sub judice and have determined not to recede. See Shaw v. S.C.L.R. Co., 229 So.2d 275 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970), cert. den. 237 So.2d 540 (Fla.1970); S.C.L.R. Co. v. Ford and Britt, 238 So.2d 473 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970); S.C.L.R. Co. v. West, 242 So.2d 156 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971), cert. den. 246 So.2d 112 (Fla.1971); S.C.L.R. Co. v. Dixon, 303 So.2d 39 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974), cert. den. 315 So.2d 181 (Fla.1975), cert. den. 423 U.S. 939, 96 S.Ct. 300, 46 L.Ed.2d 271 (1975); Schultz v. Great American Mortgage Investors, 306 So.2d 572 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) and Killingsworth v. Montgomery Ward & Co., 327 So.2d 50 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1976).
The order of the learned trial judge here interlocutory appeal is
AFFIRMED.
BOYER, C. J., and RAWLS and McCORD, JJ., concur.