Case Name: City of Hollywood Et Al. V. State Ex Rel. Ben Hur Life Ass'n
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1936-07-29
Citations: 169 So. 588
Docket Number: 
Parties: CITY OF HOLLYWOOD et al. v. STATE ex rel. BEN HUR LIFE ASS’N.
Judges: WHITFIELD, C. J., and TERRELL, BROWN, and BUFORD, JJ., concur.,
Reporter: Southern Reporter
Volume: 169
Pages: 588–589

Head Matter:
CITY OF HOLLYWOOD et al. v. STATE ex rel. BEN HUR LIFE ASS’N.
Supreme Court of Florida, Division A.
July 29, 1936.
C. H. Landefeld, Jr., of Hollywood, for plaintiffs in error.
Casey & Walton, of Miami, and W. K. Whitfield, of Tallahassee, for defendant in error.

Opinion:
DAVIS, Justice.
In this case it was stipulated and agreed by counsel for plaintiffs in error and by counsel for defendant in error that the legal questions involved in the above-styled cause are identical with those involved in that certain cause wherein the City of Fort Lauderdale et al., are plaintiffs in error and State ex rel. Elston Bank & Trust Company, etc., is defendant in error (Fla.) 169 So. 584, which last mentioned case has this day been decided by affirming the judgment rendered therein. It has further been stipulated between the counsel aforesaid that this cause may be disposed of upon the basis of the briefs and argument submitted in the said Fort Lauderdale Case this day decided.
Therefore, in accordance with the stipulation of the parties filed herein and in consideration. of the disposition of the companion case aforesaid, it is now considered, ordered, and adjudged that the judgment of the circuit court appealed from in this case be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.
Affirmed.
WHITFIELD, C. J., and TERRELL, BROWN, and BUFORD, JJ., concur.,
ELLIS, P. J., not participating.