Case Name: A. B. Randall, Individually, and as Trustee for His Infant Daughter, Alline Grace Randall, and Alline Grace Randall, a Minor, and S. Louisa Robertson, Appellants, v. John C. L'Engle, as Executor of the Last Will and Testament of Lizzie Ivey, Appellee
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1906-06
Citations: 52 Fla. 594
Docket Number: 
Parties: A. B. Randall, Individually, and as Trustee for His Infant Daughter, Alline Grace Randall, and Alline Grace Randall, a Minor, and S. Louisa Robertson, Appellants, v. John C. L’Engle, as Executor of the Last Will and Testament of Lizzie Ivey, Appellee.
Judges: 
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 52
Pages: 594–595

Head Matter:
A. B. Randall, Individually, and as Trustee for His Infant Daughter, Alline Grace Randall, and Alline Grace Randall, a Minor, and S. Louisa Robertson, Appellants, v. John C. L’Engle, as Executor of the Last Will and Testament of Lizzie Ivey, Appellee.
The concurrence of a majority of the members of the Supreme Court, sitting as one body is necessary to a decision; but where the members of the court sitting in a cause on writ of error or appeal are equally divided, the judgment of the lower court should be affirmed on the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 South. Rep. 51.
This case was decided by the court En Banc.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.
The facts in the case are stated in the opinion of the court.
M. C. Jordan, Owen & Smith and A. W. Cockrell & Son, for Appellants;
E. J. L’Engle, I. Zacharias (with whom was R. P. Daniel, Jr., on the brief), for Appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
In this case Mr. Chief Justice Shackle-ford, the Honorable John W. Malone, Circuit Judge, sitting in the place of Mr. Justice Cockrell,disqualified, and Mr. Justice Whitfield are of the opinion that the decree should be reversed, while Mr. Justice Taylor, Mr. Justice Hockior and Mr. Justice Parkhill are of the opinion that the decree should be affirmed. Under these circumstances, upon the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 South. Rept. 51; Commercial Bank v. Towers, 48 Fla. 250, 37 South. Rept. 742; Holton v. Patterson, 49 Fla. 178, 38 South. Rep. 352, and Mugge v. Tate, Jones & Co., 51 Fla. 255, 41 South. Rep. 603, an order will be entered affirming the decree. It is so ordered.