GLADYS H. GRIFFIN, INDIVIDUALLY, PETITIONER,
v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND GLADYS H. GRIFFIN AND KARL D. GRIFFIN, AS EXECUTORS OF THE ESTATE OF BERLIN GRIFFIN, DECEASED, RESPONDENTS
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 discharged a writ of certiorari, finding no jurisdictional conflict between decisions of lower courts, and thus determined the writ was improvidently issued.
No, a jurisdictional conflict of decisions does not exist.
“After a thorough consideration of the petition and record we are now led to conclude that no jurisdictional conflict of decisions is present.”
This quote establishes the court's finding that the basis for granting the writ was absent.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe petitioner sought a writ of certiorari from the Florida Supreme Court, alleging a conflict between a decision of a District Court of Appeal and pr…
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 Conflict Jurisdiction cases and more on FLexlaw
By petition for a writ of certiorari we are requested to review a decision of a District Court of Appeal, which allegedly conflicts with prior decisions of this Court and another District Court of Appeal. See United States of America v. Griffin et al., 164 So.2d 883.
Our initial examination of the petition and record suggested a possible jurisdictional conflict. We issued the writ and have heard arguments on both jurisdiction and merits.
After a thorough consideration of the petition and record we are now led to conclude that no jurisdictional conflict of decisions is present. Finding, therefore, that the writ was improvidently issued, it is hereby discharged.
It is so ordered.
ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and THOR-NAL, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
DREW, C. J., heard the argument but did not participate in the decision.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- In re Est. of Berlin Griffin v. Griffin, 164 So. 2d 883 (Fla. 2d DCA 1964)