Mosby & Russell Eng'g Assocs., Inc. v. Hudson Co., 299 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). · Go Syfert
Search
Mosby & Russell Eng'g Assocs., Inc. v. Hudson Co., 299 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 2 distinct courts.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
MOSBY & RUSSELL ENGINEERING ASSOCIATES, INC.
v.
HUDSON COMPANY OF FLORIDA and Shell Oil Company
No. 74-121.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
Aug 30, 1974.
299 So. 2d 53
Daniel E. Scott, Dillon & Scott, Sarasota, for appellant., Robert B. White, Jr., Best & Sears, Orlando, for appellee-Hudson. ., William B. Wilson, Maguire, Voorhis & Wells, Orlando, for appellee-Shell.
Cross, Owen, Walden.
Cited by 2 opinions  |  Published
PER CURIAM.

We conclude that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion of appellant-third party defendant to dismiss on the grounds of improper venue. See, Dorr-Oliver, Inc. v. Linder Industrial Machinery Company, Fla.App.1972, 263 So.2d 237; United States v. Acord, 10 Cir. 1954, 209 F.2d 709, cert. denied, 347 U.S. 975, 74 S.Ct. 786, 98 L.Ed. 1115; McGrath v. Lund’s Fisheries, D.Del.1959, 170 F. Supp. 173; 6 Wright and Miller, Federal Practice and Procedure, Section 1445 (1971); 3 Moore, Federal Practice, Section 14.28(2), (2nd ed. 1974).

Affirmed.

OWEN, C. J., and WALDEN and CROSS, JJ., concur.