No syfertize treatment data for this case.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Miami Transit Company, a Florida Corporation,
v.
I. J. Hines
v.
I. J. Hines
Supreme Court of Florida.
Jul 29, 1941.
Published opinion
Worley Gautier, for Plaintiff in Error;
James G. Pace and Carson, Petteway Stembler, for Defendant in Error.
Whitfield, Terrell, Buford, Adams, Brown, Thomas, Chapman.
Published
Lead Opinion
Per Curiam.
This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said judgment of the circuit court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, Terrell, Buford and Adams, J. J., concur. Brown, C. J., and Thomas, J., dissent. Chapman, J., not participating.Dissent
Thomas, J., dissenting.
I dissent because of the view that instructions requested by the plaintiff, numbers one and five, modified and given by the court, were erroneous and harmful to the defendant.
Brown, J., concurs.