Mahr v. General Telephone Co.

Supreme Court of Florida

Mahr v. General Telephone Co.

163 So. 2d 285, 1964 Fla. LEXIS 2943

Supreme Court of Florida·Decided April 22, 1964·No. No. 32812·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ and have heard 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 and the petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed.

It is so ordered.

THOMAS, THORNAL, O’CONNELL and CALDWELL, JJ., concur. DREW, C. J., and ROBERTS and ERVIN, 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 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 and the petition for writ of certiorari is dismissed.

It is so ordered.

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

Mahr v. General Telephone Co., 163 So. 2d 285, 1964 Fla. LEXIS 2943 (Fla. 1964).

Pincite

163 So. 2d 285 (Mahr v. General Telephone Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinions

Related