Case Name: Frederick Arthur PEACHEY, Jr., as Administrator of the Estate of the deceased minor, Frederick Arthur Peachey, III, and Frederick Arthur Peachey, Jr., individually, Petitioners, v. DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and Louis Carter Hartley, Respondents
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1966-11-23
Citations: 193 So. 2d 166
Docket Number: No. 35154
Parties: Frederick Arthur PEACHEY, Jr., as Administrator of the Estate of the deceased minor, Frederick Arthur Peachey, III, and Frederick Arthur Peachey, Jr., individually, Petitioners, v. DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and Louis Carter Hartley, Respondents.
Judges: THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, CALDWELL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 193
Pages: 166–168

Head Matter:
Frederick Arthur PEACHEY, Jr., as Administrator of the Estate of the deceased minor, Frederick Arthur Peachey, III, and Frederick Arthur Peachey, Jr., individually, Petitioners, v. DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, and Louis Carter Hartley, Respondents.
No. 35154.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Nov. 23, 1966.
Rehearing Denied Jan. 23, 1967.
Frates, Fay, Floyd & Pearson, Miami, for petitioners.
William H. Peeples, John E. Finney and Sam Daniels, Miami, for respondents.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
The petition for writ of certiorari reflected apparent jurisdiction in this Court. We issued the writ and have heard oral argument of the parties. After hearing argument and upon consideration of the petition we have determined that the cited decisions present no direct conflict as required by Article V, Section 4, Florida Constitution, F.S.A. Therefore, the petition is denied and the writ discharged.
It is so ordered.
THORNAL, C. J., and THOMAS, CALDWELL and O'CONNELL, JJ., concur.
DREW, J., dissents with Opinion.
ROBERTS and ERVIN, JJ., dissent.