Belford Trucking Co. v. Park

Supreme Court of Florida

Belford Trucking Co. v. Park

174 So. 2d 398, 1965 Fla. LEXIS 3486

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided April 21, 1965·No. No. 33596·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ and have heard oral argument of the parties. After hearing argument and upon further consideration of the matter we have determined that the cited decisions present no direct conflict as required by Article V, Section 4, Florida Constitution, F.S.A. Therefore, the writ must be and is hereby discharged, Fla.App., 165 So.2d 819, and the petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed.

It is so ordered.

DREW, C. J., and THORNAL, O’CON-NELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur. THOMAS and ROBERTS, JJ, dissent.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ and have heard oral argument of the parties. After hearing argument and upon further consideration of the matter we have determined that the cited decisions present no direct conflict as required by Article V, Section 4, Florida Constitution, F.S.A. Therefore, the writ must be and is hereby discharged, Fla.App., 165 So.2d 819, and the petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed.

It is so ordered.

DREW, C. J., and THORNAL, O’CON-NELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur. THOMAS and ROBERTS, JJ, dissent.

Belford Trucking Co. v. Park, 174 So. 2d 398, 1965 Fla. LEXIS 3486 (Fla. 1965).

Pincite

174 So. 2d 398 (Belford Trucking Co. v. Park) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related