
    V. I. Walker, by her next friend, Plaintiff in Error, v. Lavinia Willis, Administratrix, Defendant in Error.
    
    Opinion Filed July 26, 1916.
    Practice at Law—Appellate Practice.
    Where the appellate court finds that the court below erred in rejecting material and admissible evidence of the plaintiff in a cause, and the evidence of other witnesses on her behalf, and in striking all or any part of the material evidence on behalf of the plaintiff, and in directing a verdict for the defendant, the judgment below will be reversed.
    Writ of Error to Circuit Court, Dade County; H. P. Branning, Judge.
    Judgment reversed.
    
      Shackleford, J., dissents.
    
      Sanders & Norfleet, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      
      Lilbnrn R. Railey, for Defendant in Error.
   Per Curiam.

—An action was brought by Mrs. V. I. Walker by next friend, against the administratrix of the estate of A. Willis, deceased, the declaration alleging the storage of certain furniture with the decedent and the use thereof for the benefit of the decedent’s estate and destruction and loss thereof for which payment is refused. There was judgment for the defendant on a directed verdict, and the plaintiff took writ of error.

The errors assigned are in denying a new trial and in entering judgment for the defendant. Among the grounds of the motion for new trial are the rulings of 'the court in rejecting evidence for the plaintiff, and in striking all the testimony of the plaintiff and directing a verdict for the defendant.

It was error to reject the evidence of the plaintiff as to the depositing by her of her furniture with the items and value thereof in the decedent’s storage house, and in refusing to permit her to testify what had become of it since that time, and of other witnesses tending to establish the value thereof; and it was error to strike all, or any part of the evidence for the plaintiff, and error to direct a verdict for the defendant.

For the errors found, the judgment is reversed, at the cost of the defendant in error.

Taylor, C. J., and Cockrell, Whitfield and Ellis, JJ., concur.

Shackleford, J., dissents.  