Case Name: D. O. Ratliff, joined by his wife, Alice S. Ratliff, and Ratliff Holding Company, a corporation, Appellants, vs. Arthur C. Schenck, as Receiver of the Bank of Wauchula, a Corporation, Appellee
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1932-08-06
Citations: 106 Fla. 408
Docket Number: 
Parties: D. O. Ratliff, joined by his wife, Alice S. Ratliff, and Ratliff Holding Company, a corporation, Appellants, vs. Arthur C. Schenck, as Receiver of the Bank of Wauchula, a Corporation, Appellee.
Judges: Buford, C.J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown, and Davis, J.J., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 106
Pages: 408–409

Head Matter:
D. O. Ratliff, joined by his wife, Alice S. Ratliff, and Ratliff Holding Company, a corporation, Appellants, vs. Arthur C. Schenck, as Receiver of the Bank of Wauchula, a Corporation, Appellee.
134 So. 437.
En Banc.
Opinion filed August 6, 1932.
Petition for rehearing denied September 17, 1932.
W. W. Whitehurst and TreaCkvell & Treadwell, for Appellants ;
B. B. Hwjfaher, for Appellee.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
In this cause Mr. Chief Justice Buford, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Davis are of opinion that the decree of the Court below should -be affirmed while Mr. Justice Whitfield, Mr. Justice Ellis and Mr. Justice Terrell are of opinion that the said decree should be reversed. When the members of the Supreme Court, sitting six members in a body and after full consultation, it appears that the members of the Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether the decree should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the decree should be affirmed; therefore it is considered, ordered and adjudged under the authority o'f State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 So. R. 51, that the decree of the Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Buford, C.J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell, Brown, and Davis, J.J., concur.