1972 broward county hospital in record
Relatives still alive?? How can I get more information about him? My great uncle died in Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County on April 7, I am having a heck of a time finding a copy of this obit.
We were not aware of his death until a two years ago. His last living sibling Family members died in Broward County. Is there a historical society there that would look up them? I live out of State. Thank you Request Assistance for Obit in Broward Co. I would appreciate someone finding an obit on Elmer J. April 26, He lived in Hollywood, Florida. Rose was born 7 Dec. No real property owned by "Bullions" in Broward or Palm Beach counties.
There could still be married daughters in this area, of course. I am searching for descendants of a Kearney family that is known to have settled in Broward County. Here is the information I have so far: James J. Kearney b.
Health Care Schools and Careers in Florida
I would like to know the name of the cemetery they are buried in. Dear Ann There is likely to be lots of information about your grandmother, in the public domain, since she had doctor's degree. To keep it short, here is a list of questions - answers to some of them Broward County deaths by the exact date? Main Broward County Library also has access to computerized newspaper records, as well as newspapers before o Wilbur born in Indiana and died July, in Broward county.
Lived in Pompano Beach. Special Forces with Larry Merideth Kettlewell in the late 60's. I recently found out that he died in Broward Country in October 5th I wonder if anyone has access to microfilm obits during that time f Looking for obit. Lauderdale Broward FL. Dear Mr Houston One Broward County, FL newspaper will search for obits, which were computerized beginning , and will conduct a hand-search for earlier dates.
Donate Now. Sign In Register. Filed: August 6th, Precedential Status: Precedential. Citations: So. Docket Number: Author: Hugh Glickstein. Robert E. Ferris, Jr.
This is a timely appeal from the trial court's order which denied appellants' motion for judgment n. Appellees cross-appeal the granting of the new trial on damages. We affirm. The record discloses that in , Melvin I. Muroff and Gloria Muroff, his wife, owned a ninety-acre tract of undeveloped land in western Broward County, and had recorded a fifty-foot east-west easement for roadway purposes through the middle of the property. The easement disclaimed any responsibility by the Muroffs for installation or maintenance.
On April 22, , the Muroffs sold fifteen acres in the southeast quadrant of the tract to Paul Dill, appellee. At closing, Dill obtained from Muroff a signed memorandum obligating the latter to complete within fifteen days an access road to the property from Hiatus Road, which was located several hundred feet to the west of the Dill property. Dill testified that the access road was not put in as agreed, causing his plans for single family residential development of the property to be stymied.
Dill further testified that he obtained an executed document from Muroff on August 11, , certifying that within sixty days Muroff would cause a road in the center of the easement to be brought to flood criteria level. During a visit to the property in the fall of , Dill observed that the road surface had not been elevated above adjacent ground and in several areas was covered by standing water at least twenty-five feet in width. No further work on the road was undertaken. Because of the delay in development of the property caused by the problem with the road, Dill decided to sell his fifteen acres.
In January, , he executed a contract with Mr. Rivera for the sale of five acres, and in March, , executed a contract to sell the remaining ten acres to Dorothy T. Lanier and Barbara B. Each contract provided that Muroff would hold first mortgages on the parcel being conveyed. This required that the existing purchase money mortgage, given by Dill to Muroff, would be split into two separate encumbrances. Muroff, however, had not consented to the mortgage split. The Lanier-Lynch contract further required Dill to provide a paved road.
In August, , Dill filed suit against the Muroffs seeking cancellation of the deed to the fifteen acre property. While the cancellation action was pending, Muroff agreed to split the mortgage. Dill then assigned his interest in the cancellation action to Lanier and Lynch on June 25, , in exchange for their releasing him from his obligation to put in a road.
Two days later, Muroff signed a mortgage modification agreement splitting the mortgage between the two parcels. Dill concurrently delivered deeds to his purchasers.
- craig spanberger saranac michigan divorce!
- 16 2006 arrest county in iowa obrien october sheriff;
- clerk of superior court public records.
- Cookies on Adopted.com?
- criminal justice information service santa clara county?
- free to look up name by phone number.
Thereafter, Dill, Lanier and Lynch filed a second amended complaint seeking damages from the Muroffs for breach of the agreements dated April 22, , and August 11, Muroff counterclaimed, alleging that the mortgage modification was predicated upon an agreement that Dill would dismiss his suit.
At their request, an instruction was given, again over objection, that the proper measure of damages was the cost of constructing the road.
- marriage records in providence ri.
- South Florida rises to record-low temperatures;
- people looks like mary-kate ashley olsen.
- free to look up name by phone number.
- Professional Experience!
- property records in schenectady county.
The Muroffs contended that the proper measure of damages was the diminution in value of the property occasioned by the failure to complete the road. The trial court should have directed a verdict against appellees because they offered no evidence upon the correct measure of damages. The trial court should have ordered a new trial on all issues rather than granting a new trial on the issue of damages alone.
On cross appeal, Lanier and Lynch contend that the trial court should not have granted a new trial on damages, arguing that the correct measure of damages was the reasonable cost to construct the road, not diminution in property value. With respect to the first point, we are of the opinion that the trial court was correct in not directing a verdict. Two early decisions of the Florida Supreme Court are relevant. In Wynn v. Atlantic Coast Line R.
In Price v.