X hits on this document

25 views

0 shares

0 downloads

0 comments

5 / 11

DOES THE FLORIDA SUPREME COURT'S DECISION IN IN RE ESTATE OF WARTELS V. WARTELS, 357 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 1978), HAVE CONTINUING VITALITY IN LIGHT OF THE ADOPTION BY THE FLORIDA LEGISLATURE OF THE COOPERATIVE ACT, CHAPTER 76-222, LAWS OF FLORIDA?

IF THE ANSWER IS YES, IS IT LEGALLY PERMISSIBLE TO INTERPRET ARTICLE X, SECTION 4(a)(1) OF THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION DIFFERENTLY FOR FORCED SALE PURPOSES THAN DEVISE AND DESCENT PURPOSES UNDER ARTICLE X, SECTION 4 OF THE CONSTITUTION?

Pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.120(d), this jurisdictional

brief is limited to the certification of direct conflict of decisions, but the petitioners

also seek jurisdiction predicated upon the certified questions of great public

importance.

FTL:2221415:1

2 RUDEN, McCLOSKY, SMITH, SCHUSTER & RUSSELL, P.A.

Document info
Document views25
Page views25
Page last viewedSat Dec 03 10:25:50 UTC 2016
Pages11
Paragraphs165
Words1629

Comments