Case ID: fla_147/html/0745-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Richard F. Howe, as Executor of the Estate of James Deering, Deceased, v. Emily MacDonald, as Executrix of the Estate of Andrew MacDonald, deceased, and Marshall Charles.
    3 So. (2nd) 724
    En Banc
    Opinion Filed July 18, 1941
    Rehearing Denied Sept. 16, 1941
    
      Hudson & Cason, Adair, Kent, Ashby & McNatt, F. M. Hudson, Henry P. Adair and John M. McNatt, for Appellant;
    
      W. Ross Burton and Leland Hyzer, for Appellees.
   Per Curiam.

This is our second consideration of this case. Howe v. MacDonald, et al., 141 Fla. 822, 194 So. 802. It is a companion case to Howe v. Samuel Sands, et al., decided this date, there being no difference in the factual background of the two cases except in this case the bill of complaint was filed by appellees praying that they be declared to be “servants” of James Deering, entitled to inherit under his will.

In all other respects, the facts and the questions raised are identical. The judgment appealed from is accordingly reversed on authority of the latter case.

Reversed.

Brown, C. J., Whitfield, Terrell and Chapman, J. J., concur.

Buford and Thomas, J. J., dissent.

Adams, J., not participating.