Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know
Decided 1939-10-10
How this case has been cited
Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently January 2001
1 federal appellate · 2 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
¶1
It is apparent from the record that there was conflicting testimony on issues material to the case, and we arc of the opinion that the judge of the trial court should have denied the motion for an instructed verdict in favor of the defendant at the conclusion of all the testimony, as he did when a similar motion' was made after the introduction of the testimony on behalf of the plaintiff. See Pendarvis v. Pfeifer, 132 Fla. 724, 182 South. Rep. 307.
Terrell, C. J., and Buford and Tiiomas, J. J., concur.
Wi-iitfield, P. J., concurs in opinion and judgment.
*231
Justice Brown and Chapman not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.