chancellor committed error in Florida

1971However, we are of the view that the Chancellor committed error in failing to reserve jurisdiction to award alimony in the future if such should be applied for and be properly allowable. *707 Schiff v. Schiff, 123 So.2d 295 (Fla.App. 1960); Dings v. Dings, 161 So.2d 227 (Fla.App. 1964).

1971However, we are of the view that the Chancellor committed error in failing to reserve jurisdiction to award alimony in the future if such should be applied for and be properly allowable. *707 Schiff v. Schiff, 123 So.2d 295 (Fla.App. 1960); Dings v. Dings, 161 So.2d 227 (Fla.App. 1964).

1967See: Gordon v. Vaughan, Fla.App.1967, 193 So.2d 474 .

1966This Court held in Brown v. First Federal Savings & Loan Assoc. of New Smyrna, 160 So.2d 556 (1964) that the affidavit of the contractor required under the Mechanics’ Lien Law is a condition precedent to the right to maintain an action to foreclose the lien.

1964Aetna Casualty and Surety Company v. Simpson, Fla.App. 1961, 128 So.2d 420, 424 ; Vant v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company, 3 Cir.1958, 255 F.2d 263 .

1964Aetna Casualty and Surety Company v. Simpson, Fla.App. 1961, 128 So.2d 420, 424 ; Vant v. Mutual Benefit Life Insurance Company, 3 Cir.1958, 255 F.2d 263 .

1963In support of the claim for interest appellee cites 51 Am.Jur., Taxation § 1172, stating the weight of authority favors allowance of interest upon tax refunds even in the absence of an authorizing statute, and appellee cites Florida Livestock Board v. Gladden, Fla. 1956, 86 So.2d 812 , where the Supreme Court stated that in an authorized suit against a state agency payment of interest "may be impliedly authorized when the nature of the claim and the object designed in permitting such suits against the state or its agency warrant such implication * * *." We find that authority inapplicable to t

1962While it is true that a married woman may be the head of a family, Anderson v. Anderson, Fla. 1950, 44 So.2d 652 , there is a presumption that where a married couple live together in a common *195 home, the husband is the head of the family, Solomon v. Davis, supra. The stipulated statement does not contain evidence sufficient to require us to hold that the chancellor committed error in finding that appellant's husband occupied the position established by the presumption.

1961Primarily, the appellant relies upon language in the case of Horn v. City of Miami Beach, 142 Fla. 178 , 194 So. 620, 623 , in which the Supreme Court of Florida said: “Section 954, C.G.L., makes it the duty of the master in chancery, from whom the City of Miami Beach acquired a master’s deed, from the proceeds of the sale thereof to pay or cause to be paid all taxes, State, county and municipal, which are due and unpaid against the property, and such sums as were necessary to redeem the same from liens of all back taxes for tax certificates outstanding against the property.” This language fro

1961Primarily, the appellant relies upon language in the case of Horn v. City of Miami Beach, 142 Fla. 178 , 194 So. 620, 623 , in which the Supreme Court of Florida said: “Section 954, C.G.L., makes it the duty of the master in chancery, from whom the City of Miami Beach acquired a master’s deed, from the proceeds of the sale thereof to pay or cause to be paid all taxes, State, county and municipal, which are due and unpaid against the property, and such sums as were necessary to redeem the same from liens of all back taxes for tax certificates outstanding against the property.” This language fro

1960Tyler v. Tyler, Fla.App. 1959, 108 So.2d 312 ; Pergament v. Pergament, Fla.App. 1959, 117 So.2d 26 .

1960Tyler v. Tyler, Fla.App. 1959, 108 So.2d 312 ; Pergament v. Pergament, Fla.App. 1959, 117 So.2d 26 .

1956Cf. Jones v. Dove, 382 Ill. 445 , 47 N.E.2d 447 ; Higbie v. Higbie, 306 Mich. 577 , 11 N.W.2d 248 .

1956Cf. Jones v. Dove, 382 Ill. 445 , 47 N.E.2d 447 ; Higbie v. Higbie, 306 Mich. 577 , 11 N.W.2d 248 .

1956Cf. Jones v. Dove, 382 Ill. 445 , 47 N.E.2d 447 ; Higbie v. Higbie, 306 Mich. 577 , 11 N.W.2d 248 .

1956Cf. Jones v. Dove, 382 Ill. 445 , 47 N.E.2d 447 ; Higbie v. Higbie, 306 Mich. 577 , 11 N.W.2d 248 .

1955This is not’ a class suit involving a specific fund for the benefit of specific members of the class as was the case in Tenney v. City of Miami Beach, 152 Fla. 126 , 11 So.2d 188 .

1955This is not’ a class suit involving a specific fund for the benefit of specific members of the class as was the case in Tenney v. City of Miami Beach, 152 Fla. 126 , 11 So.2d 188 .

1951We have consulted the opinion of the Supreme Court of Oregon, Federal Securities Co. v. Federal Securities Corportion, 129 Or. 375 , 276 P. 1100, 1107 , 66 A.L.R. 934 , recognized by this court in Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Company v. Lumber Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, 154 Fla. 367 , 17 So.2d 615 , and have concluded that the chancellor committed no error in his ruling.

1951We have consulted the opinion of the Supreme Court of Oregon, Federal Securities Co. v. Federal Securities Corportion, 129 Or. 375 , 276 P. 1100, 1107 , 66 A.L.R. 934 , recognized by this court in Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Company v. Lumber Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, 154 Fla. 367 , 17 So.2d 615 , and have concluded that the chancellor committed no error in his ruling.

1951We have consulted the opinion of the Supreme Court of Oregon, Federal Securities Co. v. Federal Securities Corportion, 129 Or. 375 , 276 P. 1100, 1107 , 66 A.L.R. 934 , recognized by this court in Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Company v. Lumber Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, 154 Fla. 367 , 17 So.2d 615 , and have concluded that the chancellor committed no error in his ruling.

1951We have consulted the opinion of the Supreme Court of Oregon, Federal Securities Co. v. Federal Securities Corportion, 129 Or. 375 , 276 P. 1100, 1107 , 66 A.L.R. 934 , recognized by this court in Lumbermen's Mutual Casualty Company v. Lumber Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, 154 Fla. 367 , 17 So.2d 615 , and have concluded that the chancellor committed no error in his ruling.

1949The following cases are relied on to support this contention: Town of Boynton v. State, 103 Fla. 1113 , 138 So. 639 ; Humphreys v. State, 108 Fla. 92 , 145 So. 858 ; State v. Town of Boynton Beach, 116 Fla. 534 , 156 So. 539 and State ex rel.

1949The following cases are relied on to support this contention: Town of Boynton v. State, 103 Fla. 1113 , 138 So. 639 ; Humphreys v. State, 108 Fla. 92 , 145 So. 858 ; State v. Town of Boynton Beach, 116 Fla. 534 , 156 So. 539 and State ex rel.

1949The following cases are relied on to support this contention: Town of Boynton v. State, 103 Fla. 1113 , 138 So. 639 ; Humphreys v. State, 108 Fla. 92 , 145 So. 858 ; State v. Town of Boynton Beach, 116 Fla. 534 , 156 So. 539 and State ex rel.

1949The following cases are relied on to support this contention: Town of Boynton v. State, 103 Fla. 1113 , 138 So. 639 ; Humphreys v. State, 108 Fla. 92 , 145 So. 858 ; State v. Town of Boynton Beach, 116 Fla. 534 , 156 So. 539 and State ex rel.

1949The following cases are relied on to support this contention: Town of Boynton v. State, 103 Fla. 1113 , 138 So. 639 ; Humphreys v. State, 108 Fla. 92 , 145 So. 858 ; State v. Town of Boynton Beach, 116 Fla. 534 , 156 So. 539 and State ex rel.

1949The following cases are relied on to support this contention: Town of Boynton v. State, 103 Fla. 1113 , 138 So. 639 ; Humphreys v. State, 108 Fla. 92 , 145 So. 858 ; State v. Town of Boynton Beach, 116 Fla. 534 , 156 So. 539 and State ex rel.

1939The necessity for such testimony and the appearance of it in the record was established in Long v. Herrick, 26 Fla. 356 , 8 South.