Judges: BUFORD, J.
Attorneys: Cone Chapman and Davis Davis, for Appellants;
A.K. Black, J.B. Hodges and Arthur A. Simpson, for Appellees.
Filed: Dec. 02, 1936
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 387 In this case transcript of record was filed in this Court on July 1st, 1936. The last briefs were filed on August 12th, 1936, and the Court, on motion, because of the public interest involved and the emergency apparent advanced the case on the docket and heard oral argument En Banc on September 15th, 1936. On this afternoon, of November 12th, 1936, the ca
Summary: [EDITORS' NOTE: THIS PAGE CONTAINS HEADNOTES. HEADNOTES ARE NOT AN OFFICIAL PRODUCT OF THE COURT, THEREFORE THEY ARE NOT DISPLAYED.] *Page 387 In this case transcript of record was filed in this Court on July 1st, 1936. The last briefs were filed on August 12th, 1936, and the Court, on motion, because of the public interest involved and the emergency apparent advanced the case on the docket and heard oral argument En Banc on September 15th, 1936. On this afternoon, of November 12th, 1936, the cas..
More
As I interpret the facts of this case, the proposed change, however desirable it may be, amounts to a relocation of a substantial portion of State Road No. 1, which had theretofore under the statutes then in effect, been permanently designated and located, and that to accomplish this new legislation would be required. The facts as I understand them clearly differentiate this case from the case of Enzian v. State Road Dept., 122 Fla. 527, 165 So. 695.
