Case ID: fla_149/html/0023-01.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

HARRY SEGERSTROM v. E. S. WILLES
    5 So. (2nd) 59
    Division B
    December 12, 1941
    Rehearing Denied January 2, 1942
    Carroll Dunscombe, for plaintiff in error.
    G. R. Nottingham and T. B. Ellis, Jr., 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 of counsel for the respective parties and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court 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.

Affirmed.

BROWN, C. J„ TERRELL, CHAPMAN and THOMAS, JJ., concur.