Case ID: so2d_204/html/0193-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. WHITE, JOSEPH S., Circuit Judge, Retired", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Grady A. BARNARD, a minor, by his next friend and natural guardian Clara Irene Barnard, and Clara Irene Barnard, Individually, Petitioners, v. David John CREWS, Respondent.
    No. 36278.
    Supreme Court of Florida.
    Nov. 15, 1967.
    Rehearing Denied Dec. 13, 1967.
    Victor E. Raymos, Blalock & Holbrook, Lewis, Paul & Bennett, Jacksonville, for petitioners.
    Howell, Kirby, Montgomery, Sands & D’Aiuto and Borden R. Hallowes, Jacksonville, for respondent.
   PER CURIAM.

The petition for writ of certiorari reflected probable jurisdiction in this Court. After argument and upon further consideration, we have determined the writ was improvidently issued. The writ must be and is discharged and the petition is dismissed.

It is so ordered.

CALDWELL, C. J., and DREW and THORNAL, JJ., concur.

WHITE, Circuit Judge (Retired), concurs specially with Opinion.

ERVIN, J., concurs with WHITE, Circuit Judge (Retired).

WHITE, JOSEPH S., Circuit Judge, Retired

(concurring specially).

I disagree with the statement of the District Court of Appeal regarding the application of the “Last Clear Chance” doctrine, Barnard v. Crews, Fla.App.1967, 194 So.2d 44, however, I can find nothing in the record indicating that petitioner, plaintiff in the trial court, presented instructions upon the subject to the trial judge, and, in addition, only a portion of the testimony taken during the trial has been brought here, making it impossible to determine whether or not the doctrine was applicable.

ERVIN, J., concurs.