Case Name: In re the ESTATE of Garfield A. WOOD, Deceased. John S. CHOWNING and the Miami Beach First National Bank, as Executors of the Estate of Garfield A. Wood, Deceased, et al., Petitioners, v. Garfield A. WOOD, Jr., Respondent
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1973-05-23
Citations: 278 So. 2d 614
Docket Number: No. 43348
Parties: In re the ESTATE of Garfield A. WOOD, Deceased. John S. CHOWNING and the Miami Beach First National Bank, as Executors of the Estate of Garfield A. Wood, Deceased, et al., Petitioners, v. Garfield A. WOOD, Jr., Respondent.
Judges: CARLTON, C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and DREW (Retired), JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 278
Pages: 614–614

Head Matter:
In re the ESTATE of Garfield A. WOOD, Deceased. John S. CHOWNING and the Miami Beach First National Bank, as Executors of the Estate of Garfield A. Wood, Deceased, et al., Petitioners, v. Garfield A. WOOD, Jr., Respondent.
No. 43348.
Supreme Court of Florida.
May 23, 1973.
Rehearing Denied June 27, 1973.
Woodrow M. Melvin, Jr., and Mark V. Silverio, of Mershon, Sawyer, Johnston, Dunwody & Cole, Miami, for petitioners.
Edwin O. Simon of Redfearn & Simon and Wm. J. Pruitt, Miami, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us to review the decision of the District Court of Appeal, Third District, reported at 271 So.2d 42, a decision certified by the District Court as passing on a question of great public interest, recited by that Court as follows:
"[D]oes an amended petition for revocation of a will which contains a renunciation of righ,t to take under the will relate back to the time of the filing of the first petition which did not contain a. renunciation, so that the renunciation is timely even though the statutory time for the filing of a renunciation expired prior to the filing of the amended petition?"
We have jurisdiction of the cause under the authority of Section 3(b) (3), Article V, Constitution of Florida, F.S.A., F.A.R. 4.6, 32 F.S.A.
After argument and upon consideration of the record and briefs, we hold that the District Court of Appeal has correctly decided the cause and its decision is adopted as the ruling of this Court.
Accordingly, certiorari is discharged.
It is so ordered.
CARLTON, C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and DREW (Retired), JJ., concur.