Case Name: In re ESTATE of Lavina E. WANDREY, Deceased. Sarah HORNBY, J. W. Shunk, J. H. Windeler, J. H. Tulloch, Pearl C. Woollomes, and the First National Bank of Leesburg, Leesburg, Florida, as Executor of the Estate of Louise Smith, Deceased, Petitioners, v. Agnes GUILLIAMS, individually, and as Executrix of the Estate of Lavina E. Wandrey, deceased, Clyde Guilliams, individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem of Sandra Guilliams, a minor, and Florida Baptist Foundation, Respondents
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1966-03-16
Citations: 184 So. 2d 176
Docket Number: No. 34534
Parties: In re ESTATE of Lavina E. WANDREY, Deceased. Sarah HORNBY, J. W. Shunk, J. H. Windeler, J. H. Tulloch, Pearl C. Woollomes, and the First National Bank of Leesburg, Leesburg, Florida, as Executor of the Estate of Louise Smith, Deceased, Petitioners, v. Agnes GUILLIAMS, individually, and as Executrix of the Estate of Lavina E. Wandrey, deceased, Clyde Guilliams, individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem of Sandra Guilliams, a minor, and Florida Baptist Foundation, Respondents.
Judges: THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, DREW, O’CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 184
Pages: 176–176

Head Matter:
In re ESTATE of Lavina E. WANDREY, Deceased. Sarah HORNBY, J. W. Shunk, J. H. Windeler, J. H. Tulloch, Pearl C. Woollomes, and the First National Bank of Leesburg, Leesburg, Florida, as Executor of the Estate of Louise Smith, Deceased, Petitioners, v. Agnes GUILLIAMS, individually, and as Executrix of the Estate of Lavina E. Wandrey, deceased, Clyde Guilliams, individually, and as Guardian Ad Litem of Sandra Guilliams, a minor, and Florida Baptist Foundation, Respondents.
No. 34534.
Supreme Court of Florida.
March 16, 1966.
For opinion of District Court of Appeal see 175 So.2d 786.
P. C. Gorman, Leesburg, for petitioners.
Huebsch & Aulls, Eustis, for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
After careful consideration of the record and briefs in this case in the light of the argument of counsel, we conclude that no such conflict has been demonstrated as justifies the exercise of jurisdiction by this court.
The writ issued herein is discharged.
THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS, DREW, O'CONNELL, CALDWELL and ERVIN, JJ., concur.