Dwiggins v. McLeod

168 So. 401, 124 Fla. 333, 1936 Fla. LEXIS 1122
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided May 22, 1936·Published

Opinion

*334 Pee Curiam.

This is an appeal from a decree sustaining a motion to dismiss the bill of complaint filed by the appellant in the court below. After consideration of the transcript of the record and the briefs and arguments of counsel for the respective parties Mr. Chief Justice Whitfield, Mr. Justice Terrell and Mr. Justice Davis are of the opinion that the decree appealed from should be reversed, while Mr. Presiding Justice Ellis, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Buford are of the opinion that said decree should be affirmed. The members of the court being equally divided in opinion as to whether or not said decree should be reversed, the result is that under the familiar doctrine of Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 So. 51, the decree appealed from must be and is hereby

Affirmed.

Whitfield, C. J., and Ellis, Terrell, Brown, Buford and Davis, J. J., concur.

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

Dwiggins v. McLeod, 168 So. 401, 124 Fla. 333, 1936 Fla. LEXIS 1122 (Fla. 1936).

168 So. 401 (Dwiggins v. McLeod) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung
47 Fla. 224 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1904)
Griffith v. Alcocke
37 So. 47 (Supreme Court of Louisiana, 1904)