MARY B. YODER, EXECUTRIX OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF GEORGE M. MADDOX, DECEASED, AND INDIVIDUALLY, JOINED BY HER HUSBAND, JOSEPH A. YODER, APPELLANT,
v.
S. A. MADDOX AND MARGARET JENNER, JOINED BY HER HUSBAND, M. JENNER, APPELLEES
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 decree due to an equal division among the justices, establishing a precedent for affirming decisions when the court is equally divided.
When the Supreme Court is equally divided and there is no prospect of change in the court's composition, the decree of the lower court should be affirmed.
“In this cause Mr. Chief Justice Buford, Mr. Justice Whitfield and Mr. Justice Ellis are of opinion that the decree of the Circuit Court should be reversed and the cause remanded while Mr. Justice Terrell, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Davis are of opinion that the said decree should be affirmed.”
Describes the equal division among the justices.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThis case involved an appeal of a decree from the Circuit Court. The Florida Supreme Court heard the case with six justices participating.…
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 Whitfield and Mr. Justice Ellis are of opinion that the decree of the Circuit Court should be reversed and the cause remanded while Mr. Justice Terrell, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Davis are of opinion that the said decree should be affirmed. When the members of the Supreme Court, sitting six members *355in 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 decree should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the decree 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 decree of the Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Buford, C.J., and Whitfield, Ehlis, Terrell, Brown and Davis, J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (16 total)
-
Delbert Lee Tibbs v. State, 397 So. 2d 1120 (Fla. 1981)…s language is imprecise, a careful reading of the opinion seems to indicate that reversal was based on the state’s failure to place the defendants at the scene of the crime or to prove that they fired the fatal shots. McNeil v. State, 104 Fla. 360, 139 So. 791 (1932), and Woodward v. State, 113 Fla. 301, 151 So. 509 (1933), are similar to Williams. In McNeil this Court reversed because “the evidence of identity of the accused as being the guilty party [was] not satisfactory to the appellate court .... ” 1…
-
Clark v. State, 379 So. 2d 97 (Fla. 1979)…e of the jury to decide, and we will not reverse a judgment based upon a verdict returned by a jury when there is competent evidence which is also substantial in character to support the jury’s verdict. Tibbs v. State; McNeil v. State, 104 Fla. 360, 139 So. 791 (1932). There are no discrepancies in the essential facts of Johnston’s testimony. There is no question as to the identification of Clark or the fact that Clark’s Blazer was identified as being in the bank’s parking lot at the precise time that the…
-
Delbert Tibbs v. State, 337 So. 2d 788 (Fla. 1976)…rule that a conviction will be reversed and a new trial ordered, where the evidence relied on is not satisfactory to establish the identity of an accused as a participant in a crime of which he has been found guilty.” McNeil v. State, 104 Fla. 360, 139 So. 791, 792 (1932). Rather than risk the very real possibility that Tibbs had nothing to do with these crimes, we reverse his conviction and remand for a new trial. SUNDBERG and HATCHETT, JJ., concur. BOYD, J., concurs specially with an opinion. [*792]…
Previewing 3 of 16 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)