BERT A. SHAW, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
THE STATE OF FLORIDA, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's judgment due to an equal division among the justices, establishing a precedent for affirming judgments in such circumstances.
When the members of the Supreme Court, sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the judgment should be affirmed.
“When the members of the Supreme Court, sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the judgment should be affirmed”
This quote establishes the rule for affirming a judgment when the court is equally divided.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved a dispute where the Florida Supreme Court justices were equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the judgment of the Criminal…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
—In this cause Mr. Chief Justice Buford, Mr. Justice Ellis and Mr. Justice Terrell are of Opinion that the judgment of the Criminal Court of Record should be affirmed, while Mr. Justice Whitfield, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Davis are of opinion that the said judgment should be reversed. When the members of the Supreme Court, sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the judgment should be affirmed; therefore it is considered, ordered and adjudged under the authority of State ex rel. Hampton vs. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 So. R. 51, that the judgment of the Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Bupord, C.J. and Whitpield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown and Davis, J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Palm Beach Ests. v. Bula E. Croker, 106 Fla. 617 (Fla. 1932)…final decree rendered by him, based largely or solely on questions of fact, will not be reversed, unless the evidence shows that it was erroneous. Tampa Water Works Co. v. Wood, 104 Fla. 306, 139 Sou. Rep. 800; McEwen v. Growers Loan & Guaranty Co., 104 Fla. 176, 139 Sou. Rep. 805; Johns v. Bowden, 72 Fla. 530, 73 Sou. Rep. 603; Carr v. Lesley, 73 Fla. 233, 74 Sou. Rep. 207; Farrington v. Harrison, 95 Fla. 769, 116 Sou. Rep. 497. A careful study of the evidence shown by the transcript of the record fails t…
-
Annibelle Jackson and Henry N. Jackson v. Parker, 153 Fla. 622 (Fla. 1943)…ute a mortgage; and we have held that parol evidence is admissible to show that a mortgage was intended to secure future advances, in addition to the amount that had actually been advanced when the mortgage was made. McEwan v. Growers Loan etc. Co., 104 Fla. 176, 139 So. 805. Where the contract, deed and mortgage appear to have been co-related parts of one general trans [*638] action, they may all be considered in arriving at the intention of the parties as to the release clause. Gardenia Estates v. Grove l…
-
Therrell v. The State Life Ins. Co., 107 Fla. 450 (Fla. 1932)…ues and profits of the mortgaged property which had been expressly pledged as part of the security for the debt being foreclosed. See Carolina Portland Cement Co. v. Baumgartner, 99 Fla. 987, 128 Sou. Rep. 241; McEwen v. Growers Loan & Guaranty Co., 104 Fla. 176, 139 Sou. Rep. 805. So the question raised on this appeal, necessarily resolves itself into the proposition as to' whether or not the statutory liquidator of the defunct Trust Company, holder of the legal title, was properly divested by the order a…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The State of Fla. ex rel. Hiram J. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224 (Fla. 1904)