Harrison v. Richter Jewelry Co.
Harrison v. Richter Jewelry Co.
194 So. 218; 141 Fla. 859; 1940 Fla. LEXIS 875
(Southern Reporter)
Harrison v. Richter Jewelry Co.
Opinion of the Court
AVrit of error was sued out to judgment on demurrer to an amended declaration although at the time of the judgment the plaintiff had filed a second amended *860 declaration for the evident purpose of confessing error under rule 40 of the common law rules. In this situation the entry of the judgment on the demurrer to the first amended declaration' was error.
Reversed.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.