WILLIAM H. STUBBLEFIELD, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
T. O. WILSON, DEFENDANT IN ERROR

Fla. | 1924-11-18
88 Fla. 323 Florida Supreme Court (1924) Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

In this case the Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Whitfield and Mr. Justice Browne are of the opinion that the judgment should be affirmed, while Mr. Justice Ellis, Mr. Justice West and Mr. Justice Terrell are of opinion that the judgment should be reversed; and there being no prospect of a change of judicial opinion, the judgment should be affirmed on the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 South. Rep. 51, and Pensacola Electric Co. v. Humphreys 61 Fla. 389, 54 South, Rep. 452.

An order will be entered affirming the judgment to which the Writ of Error herein was taken.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Dale v. Jennings, 90 Fla. 234 (Fla. 1925)
    …ere is no prospect of a change of judicial opinion in the premises or of an immediate change in the personnel of the court, the judgment, decree or order should be affirmed, so that the litigation may not be unduly prolonged. Stubblefield v. Wilson, 88 Fla. 323, 102 South. Rep. 885; State ex rel. Amos v. Hamwey, 87 Fla. 55, 100 South. Rep. 796; Colman v. Macha, 87 Fla. 529, 100 South. Rep. 796. Where the members of the Supreme Court sitting six members in a body after full consultation are equally divided…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw