Case ID: fla_102/html/0921-02.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

City of St. Petersburg, a Municipal Corporation, Plaintiff in Error, vs. Bertha M. Richards, unmarried, Defendant in Error.
    
    136 So. 606.
    Special Division B.
    Decision filed September 14, 1931.
    
      Raney H. Martin and Carroll R. Runyon, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      Wilson & Rogue, for Defendant in Error.
   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 Conrt 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.

Buford, C.J., and Whitfield and Davis, J.J., concur.