WILLIAM L. BROOKS
v.
STATE

Fla. | 1939-06-30
Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Brown, Buford, Chapman and Ti-iomas, J. J., concur.
138 Fla. 803 Florida Supreme Court (1939)
Also reported at: 190 So. 261

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's judgment due to an equal division among the justices. This outcome is mandated when the court is equally divided and there's no prospect of resolution.


Holding

When the members of the Supreme Court are permanently and equally divided in opinion as to whether a judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the Court's personnel, the judgment of the lower court should be affirmed.


Key Quotes

“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 judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the judgment should be affirmed”

Establishes the rule for disposition when the court is equally divided.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The case involved an appeal to the Florida Supreme Court. The seven justices were equally divided on whether to affirm or reverse the lower court's ju…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.

Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam. —

Per Curiam. —

In this cause Mr. Chief Justice Terrell, Mr. Justice Brown and Mr. Justice Thomas are of opinion that the Judgment of the Circuit Court should be affirmed while Mr. Justice Whitfield, Mr. Justice Buford and Mr. Justice Chapman are of opinion that the said Judgment 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 judgment should be affirmed or reversed, and there is no prospect of an immediate change in the personnel of the Court, the judgment should be affirmed; therefore it is considered, ordered and adjudged under the authority of State ex rel. Hampton v. McClung, 47 Fla. 224, 37 So. R. *80451, that the judgment of the Circuit Court in this cause be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Brown, Buford, Chapman and Ti-iomas, J. J., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw