Case ID: fla_137/html/0395-01.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

P. Guy Crew: v. Bonnie C. Parsons.
    188 So. 635.
    D vision B.
    Opinion Filed March 24, 1939.
    Rehearing Denied April 25, 1939.
    
      Edgar W. Waybright, Sr., and Roger I. Way bright, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      John E. Mathews, for Defendant in Error.
   Per Curiam.

This case is here for review on writ of error to a final judgment in behalf of the defendant below entered by the Circuit Court of Duval County, Florida. The suit was on the common counts, with a special count for the recovery of an attorney’s fee. The case was submitted to the jury on pleas of: (a) did not promise as alleged; (bj never was indebted; and (c) a plea of estoppel. The jury, after hearing the evidence on the issues joined and the instructions of the Court upon the law of the case, rendered a verdict for the defendant. Motion for a new trial was made and an order denying the same entered and final judgment in behalf of the defendant was entered in the lower court and a writ of error was sued out, bill of exceptions settled, and the appeal perfected to this Court, with several assignments of error.

We have considered each assignment of error made and examined the briefs and citations of authorities, and having heard argument at the bar of this Court on the part of counsel for the respective parties, we find ample evidence in the record to sustain the verdict of the jury rendered upon proper charges or instructions by the court, and no error appearing in the record, the judgment appealed from is hereby affirmed. It is so ordered.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chapman, J. J., concur.

Thomas, J., concurs in the opinion and judgment.

Justices Terrell and Buford not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927 and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.

On Petition for Rehearing

Per Curiam.

On petition for rehearing it is suggested

that the jury in the lower court did not pass upon the conflicts appearing in the evidence offered by the respective parties under stipulations but found a verdict for the defendant below and the verdict as found by the jury was rendered in accordance with the directions of the trial court. We agree with counsel for the petitioner in this contention and the record sustains such a conclusion, but we are unable to agree that reversible error occurred when the trial court instructed the jury to find a verdict for the defendant in the lower court.

There is nothing suggested in the petition for a rehearing that would justify this Court in granting a rehearing in this cause and for this reason the petition for rehearing is denied.

It is so ordered.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Chipman, J. J., concur.

Buford and Thomas, J. J., concur in opinion and judgment.

. Justice Terrell not participating as authorized by Section 4687 Compiled General Laws of 1927 and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.