Whyhopen v. Via

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• “[lessors’] argument that tenants were required to exercise their option as to all the land listed on the contract for sale is incorrect.’’

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• B&R Oil Company, Inc., Empire Petroleum Partners, LLC, and EPP-Atlas Acquisitions, LLC v. William E. Stoler, Kathlyn Stoler, Jeffrey A. Levy, and Con-Serve, Inc.
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 2017-05-30· cited 25×
• Wyhopen v. Via
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1984-01-04· cited 1×
• In re Sixty Sixty Condominium Ass'n
  S.D. Florida· 2017-08-07
• THE BLIND MONK, LLC v. 410 EVERNIA STREET PARTNERS, LLC
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 2023-07-19

Cites

2 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Denco, Inc. v. Belk
  Supreme Court of Florida· 1957-10-09· cited 24×
• Vorpe v. Key Island, Inc.
  District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1979-08-01· cited 11×