
    O. J. Whitaker, Plaintiff in Error, v. Bertha J. Wright, a free dealer, Defendant in Error.
    
    En Banc.
    Opinion filed March 27, 1930.
    
      Anderson & Lewis, for Plaintiff in Error;
    
      W. G. Bamseur, for Defendant in Error.
   Mati-iews, Commissioner:

This cause is presented upon motion to dismiss the writ of error herein which was sued out to a final judgment.

The grounds of the motion are that all errors are predicated upon matters in pais and that such matters are not evidenced by a bill of exceptions.

Several errors are assigned by plaintiff in error questioning the correctness of an order of the court below in vacating and setting aside an order of non-suit and reinstating of the cause on the trial docket.

The order of non-suit and the order reinstating the cause are contained in the transcript. These orders are a part of the record proper. Poppell v. Culpepper, 56 Fla. 515, 47 So. R. 351.

It was not necessary for defendant in error to have taken a non-suit in the court below. Circuit Court Rule 51;, Haile v. Mason Hotel & Inv. Co., 71 Fla. 469, 71 So. R. 540. And no reason for dismissing the writ of error has been' made to appear.

Motion denied.

Per Curiam.

The record in this cause having been considered by the Court, and the foregoing opinion prepared under Chapter 14553, Acts of 1929, adopted by the Court as its opinion, it is considered and ordered by the Court that the motion to dismiss the writ of error herein should be, and the same is hereby, denied.

Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Strum, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.  