Case Name: SAM D. BENNETT v. ORANGE STATE OIL COMPANY, a corporation, and ESTHER L. POWERS
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1947-08-01
Citations: 159 Fla. 440
Docket Number: 
Parties: SAM D. BENNETT v. ORANGE STATE OIL COMPANY, a corporation, and ESTHER L. POWERS.
Judges: THOMAS, C. J., TERRELL and BARNS, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 159
Pages: 440–446

Head Matter:
SAM D. BENNETT v. ORANGE STATE OIL COMPANY, a corporation, and ESTHER L. POWERS.
31 So. (2nd) 921
June Term, 1917
August 1, 1947
En Banc
Rehearing denied October 18, 1917.
B. K. Roberts and W. J. Oven, Jr., Carlton & Ellis, for appellant.
Hudson & Cason, Liddon, Fee & Parker, for Orange State Oil Company, and Butt & Akridge for Esther L. Powers, appellees.

Opinion:
HOLT, Associate Justice:
After a full review of all the transactions and negotiations which over a long period of years, including leases, cancellations thereof, agreements for sale of petroleum products, loans, mortgages, guarantees, with a bankruptcy proceeding thrown in for good measure, no other conclusion can be reached save that of the Chancellor, which I find to be eminently correct.
We have already decided a number of issues between the parties in Bennett v. Orange State Oil Co., 157 Fla. 27 So. (2nd) 417. This case cannot be dismissed from consideration. To reverse the Chancellor's order now being reviewed the prior opinion (Bennett v. Orange State Oil Co., 157 Fla. 882, 27 So. (2nd) 417, would have to be specifically reversed so that the parties could be restored to their original position before the institution of any litigation between them.
While the testimony is voluminous proper analysis thereof would lead one to the inevitable conclusion that fraud, overreaching, undue advantage, and all allied elements thereof are totally absent. The appellant sums up and decides his own case against himself in these words found on page 85 of the transcript:
"A. Well, I wound up with the lease, the same amount, the same consideration in dollars and cents; you can put it that way."
The decree should be and it is affirmed.
THOMAS, C. J., TERRELL and BARNS, JJ., concur.
BUFORD and CHAPMAN, JJ., dissent.