Case Name: CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL and Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York, Petitioners, v. Hazel STEWART, Widow, and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents; CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL and Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Hazel STEWART, Widow, and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents; Hazel STEWART, Widow, Cross-Petitioner, v. CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL, Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York, Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, and Florida Industrial Commission, Cross-Respondents
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1965-01-08
Citations: 171 So. 2d 367
Docket Number: Nos. 33307, 33293
Parties: CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL and Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York, Petitioners, v. Hazel STEWART, Widow, and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents. CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL and Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Hazel STEWART, Widow, and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents. Hazel STEWART, Widow, Cross-Petitioner, v. CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL, Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York, Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, and Florida Industrial Commission, Cross-Respondents.
Judges: DREW, C. J., and THORNAL, ERVIN and HOBSON (Ret.), JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 171
Pages: 367–368

Head Matter:
CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL and Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York, Petitioners, v. Hazel STEWART, Widow, and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents. CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL and Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, Petitioners, v. Hazel STEWART, Widow, and Florida Industrial Commission, Respondents. Hazel STEWART, Widow, Cross-Petitioner, v. CARPENTERS DISTRICT COUNCIL, Fidelity & Casualty Company of New York, Pennsylvania Threshermen & Farmers Mutual Casualty Insurance Company, and Florida Industrial Commission, Cross-Respondents.
Nos. 33307, 33293.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Jan. 8, 1965.
Rehearing Denied Feb. 6, 1965.
D. J. McDonald, Coral Gables, and Lally, Miller & Hodges, Miami, for petitioners and cross-respondents.
Richard A. Sicking and Kaplan, Ser, Abrams & O’Malley, Miami, for respondent and cross-petitioner.
Patrick H. Mears, Tallahassee, and J. Franklin Garner, Lakeland, for Florida Industrial Commission.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court on petitions and cross-petition for writ of certiorari upon the transcript of record and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties to review the order of the Florida Industrial Commission in said cause, bearing date January 9, 1964, and the petitioners and cross-petitioner having failed to show that the essential requirements of law have been violated, it is ordered that the said petitions be and the same are hereby denied. See Harbor Island Spa v. Barlow, Fla. 1962, 139 So.2d 879; Victor Wine & Liquor, Inc. v. Beasley, Fla.1962, 141 So.2d 581.
DREW, C. J., and THORNAL, ERVIN and HOBSON (Ret.), JJ., concur.
THOMAS, O'CONNELL and CALDWELL, JJ., dissent.