Daniel v. Holmes Lumber Co.
Opinions
ON HEARING EN BANC
The court on its own motion considered this case en banc, Fla.R.App.P. 9.331, after a majority vote that hearing en banc was necessary under the rule, prior to release of a proposed panel opinion. Upon en banc consideration the court was evenly divided as to disposition of the appeal, Judges Mills, Booth, Wentworth, Joanos, Thompson and Barfield voting to affirm the deputy on the grounds that the claim of Leonard H. Daniel is barred by the limitations provision of Florida Statutes, § 440.19(1), and Judges Ervin, Smith, Shivers, Wiggin-ton, Nimmons and Zehmer voting to reverse. The effect of the vote is to affirm the deputy, Rule 9.331(a), supra.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
471 So. 2d 60 (Daniel v. Holmes Lumber Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.