Case Name: DADE COUNTY, Florida, BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, a body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. MICHIGAN MUTUAL LIABILITY COMPANY, a mutual insurance company organized under the laws of the State of Michigan, Harnett, Inc., a Florida corporation, and George Insurance Agency, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1964-12-09
Citations: 169 So. 2d 483
Docket Number: No. 33559
Parties: DADE COUNTY, Florida, BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, a body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. MICHIGAN MUTUAL LIABILITY COMPANY, a mutual insurance company organized under the laws of the State of Michigan, Harnett, Inc., a Florida corporation, and George Insurance Agency, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees.
Judges: DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, THORNAL, O’CONNELL and CALDWELL, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 169
Pages: 483–484

Head Matter:
DADE COUNTY, Florida, BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, a body corporate and politic under the laws of the State of Florida, Appellant, v. MICHIGAN MUTUAL LIABILITY COMPANY, a mutual insurance company organized under the laws of the State of Michigan, Harnett, Inc., a Florida corporation, and George Insurance Agency, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees.
No. 33559.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Dec. 9, 1964.
Bolles, Prunty, Martin & Goodwin and Kenneth L. Ryskamp, Miami, for appellant.
Patton & Kanner and Welsh, Cornell, Pyszka & Carlton, Miami, for appellees.

Opinion:
ERVIN, Justice.
There has been filed in this cause a suggestion of recusal by the attorneys for appellant. The suggestion is that during my term as Attorney General of the State of Florida I rendered an opinion pled by the appellees in the complaint on one of the points involved in this litigation. During the fifteen years which I served as Attorney General of Florida I rendered several thousand opinions. Obviously my services on the Court as an incumbent Justice thereof would be greatly impaired if it were incumbent upon me to disqualify myself in cases where issues were raised concerning the same subjects on which I expressed opinions while Attorney General. Accordingly for these reasons I must, and do, decline to recuse myself. See Section 30-A Am.Jur., Judges, Sections 169 et seq., and 48 C.J.S. Judges § 82, 83, 89, pages 1062, 1063, 1068, 1069, 1076 and 1077.
PER CURIAM.
The foregoing declination to recuse himself filed in this cause by Justice Ervin is hereby agreed to and approved.
It is so ordered.
DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, THORNAL, O'CONNELL and CALDWELL, JJ., concur.