Yarnell v. Gregory

101 So. 37, 88 Fla. 91
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided June 18, 1924·Published·Cited by 6 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this ease the Chief Justice, Mr. Justice Whitfield and Mr. Justice Terrell are of the opinion that the decree entered by the trial court from which the appeal is taken should be affirmed, AArhile Mr. Justice Ellis, Mr. Justice Browne and Mr. Justice West are of the opinion that said decree should be reversed; and, there being no prospect of a change of judicial opinion, the decree should be affirmed on the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 South. Rep. 51; Pensacola Electric Co. v. Humphreys, 61 Fla. 389, 54 South. Rep. 452; Quigg, Chief of Police, v. Radel, 86 Fla. 197, 97 South. Rep. 380; and State ex rel. Amos v. Hamwey, 87 Fla. 55, 100 South Rep. 796.

An order will be entered affirming the decree herein.

All Concur.

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

Yarnell v. Gregory, 101 So. 37, 88 Fla. 91 (Fla. 1924).

101 So. 37 (Yarnell v. Gregory) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

National City Bank v. Beulah Baptist Institutional Church
122 So. 274 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1929)
Butler v. Jones
118 So. 684 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1928)
Jackson v. State
113 So. 382 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Cravatt v. Pierson
113 So. 94 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Johns and Ellzey v. Wilkerson
112 So. 891 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1927)
Broaddus v. Theurer
111 So. 110 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1926)