PAUL RYAN, 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, a situation where the court's precedent dictates affirmation.
When the members of the Supreme Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether a judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the court's personnel, 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 states the rule applied by the court when justices are 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 an appeal where the six justices of the Florida Supreme Court were equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the lower court's…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Affirmance Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
The Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Whiteield and Mr. Justice Bueord are of opinion that the judgment in this cause should be affirmed. Mr. Justice Terrell, Mr. Justice Strum and Mr. Justice Brown are of opinion that the 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 v. 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.
Ellis, C. J., and Whiteield, Terrell, Strum, Brown and Bueord, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- The State of Fla. ex rel. Hiram J. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224 (Fla. 1904)