Case ID: fla_101/html/1265-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "Per Curiam. Per Curiam.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Card C. Sweetland, Appellant, vs. Wilma T. Sweetland, Appellee.
    
    En Banc.
    Opinion filed April 30, 1929.
    Decree reaffirmed on rehearing March 23, 1931.
    
      Charles A. Morehead for Appellant;
    
      Semple <& Hirschman, for Appellee.
   Per Curiam.

In this case Mr. Chief Justice Terrell, Mr. Justice Whitfield and Mr. Justice Ellis are of opinion that the decree of the Circuit Court should be affirmed, while Mr. Justice Strum, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Buford are of the opinion that the decree should be reversed. When the members of the Supreme Court sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, it appears that the members of the court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the decree should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the court, the decree should be affirmed; therefore it is considered, ordered and adjudged under the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 South. Rep. 51, that the decree of the Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.

On Rehearing.

Decision filed March 24, 1931.

Per Curiam.

This cause coming on to be further considered upon a petition for rehearing filed by the Appellant, and Mr. Justice Whitfield, Mr. Justice Ellis and Mr. Justice Terrell being of the opinion that the decree of the Circuit Court should be affirmed, while Mr. Chief Justice Buford, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Davis are of opinion that said decree should be reversed; it is therefore ordered by the Court that the decree of the Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.

All concur.