Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout0632 r . r / ~l ~ ~~~~~f~ ~ ~ IN T~IE CTRCUIT COURT FOR ST. LUCI~ COUNTY, FLURIDA _ - - N0. 75-40 CP ~ W. K. COXF and DJRIS H. COXE, his wifa, - ~ Plainti,ffs ~ vs . . EXECUTIVE COFtPCaRATIODT OF FL(7,~IDA, sometimes k.nown as EX~:CU~I: ~i~E ~ - ~ _ CORPORA,TION, ~ Florida corporation,`=` - et a1, _ . - ~ . Defendants ~ ~ . 1 : ~ ~ - FINAL JUDGMEL~ZT ~ _ _ This cause ca e ~ m on for fina~. hearing the~ day of _ , 1975, on plaintiffs' complaint, answer and cross- claim of defendant BERT SAUL GONSULTING ENGINEER, INC., and cQpy - of Claim of Lien of defendant, ROBERT L. k'kiITMAN marked "Ori- - - ginal Defensive Pleading", and it appearing to the Cour~ from thp record that a default had been entered against the ~efendant E~ECUTIVE CORPORATION OF FLC?RIDA, sometimes known as F~KECUTIVE - ~ CORPORATION, a Florida c~rporatior,, and the Court having received - evidence, both oral and documenta.;-y, and the cause having been. - submi±ted to tr,e Court, a:~d the Gourt being fully advised iri the _ premises, the Court finds the facts as follows: The material sZlEgations contained in the plaintiffs' ' complaint ha4,~e been _proven by competent evidence; that p].ainti~fs - have expended $40.00 to bring the abstract of tit~.e on sui~ject pragerty current immediateiy~pra.or to filing th~ foreciosure; that plaintiffs have also expended-thP sum of $242.93 in payment of the 1.974 real.property taxes on subject property to keep the ~ : same from gaing delinquent,.the cost of both o~ which they are . entitled to recover, and plaintiffs are furt~er entitled to--re- _ LAW OFFICES . - ~ _ . ~ wr~z~s, eirrarv ~ v?•~~ES p ~ ~ ~ : ~ P. o. eox ~ 84~4 ~rt~t7 PACi - ; . _ FORT PIERCE. FLORIDA 384D0 ~ •_,ti,-.,_-- - _ . ' . . -