Howe v. Sands, (1940)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 9
Judges: CHAPMAN, J.
Attorneys: F.M. Hudson, Henry, P. Adair, John M. McNatt, Hudson Cason, Adair, Kent, Ashby McNatt, for Appellant;
E.P. Ellis, Lilburn R. Bailey and Walsh Ellis, for Appellees; Van C. Swearingen, for Appellee Gus Calloway.
ON PETITION OF GUS CALLOWAY FOR REHEARING.
Filed: Apr. 16, 1940
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: On petition for rehearing on the part of the defendant Gus Calloway it was suggested that this Court failed to consider certain testimony in the record concerning his said status. The record shows that the *Page 626 petitioner became an employee of James Deering in 1914 and continued as such for some two or three years after the death of the said James Deering; that the petitioner is advanced in years and is being paid a pension by the said estate and the pension has been paid for many years, an
Summary: On petition for rehearing on the part of the defendant Gus Calloway it was suggested that this Court failed to consider certain testimony in the record concerning his said status. The record shows that the *Page 626 petitioner became an employee of James Deering in 1914 and continued as such for some two or three years after the death of the said James Deering; that the petitioner is advanced in years and is being paid a pension by the said estate and the pension has been paid for many years, and..
More
I think Gus Calloway is entitled to participate as a beneficiary under the Deering will and that the decree of the chancellor should be affirmed.
THOMAS, J., concurs.
Source: CourtListener
