Gribbel v. Henderson, (1943)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 10
Judges: PER CURIAM:
Attorneys: Carl T. Hoffman, L.L. Robinson, Sam C. Matthews, and J. Lewis Hall, for petitioners.
Tillman Henderson, and Mabry, Reaves, Carlton White, for respondents.
Filed: Jul. 16, 1943
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: ON REHEARING GRANTED A rehearing having been granted and the Court having heard oral argument and further considered the record and briefs, it is ordered that we now adhere to our former judgment. *Page 398 TERRELL, BROWN, CHAPMAN, THOMAS and ADAMS, JJ., concur. BUFORD, C. J., dissents. SEBRING, J., not participating.
On reconsideration of this case, I do not think that the allegations of the bill of complaint are sufficient to show that the defendant-Executors under the Gribbel will are barred from pleading the statute of non-claim. It is my opinion that the plea of non-claim either presented an issue with the burden of proof on the defendant, or else presented a condition requiring amendments to the bill of complaint as replications are no longer available.
So the order striking the plea should be quashed.
Source: CourtListener
