
    Mary A. Cruger v. City of Miami.
    152 So. 409.
    Division B.
    Opinion Filed December 5, 1933.
    Petition for Rehearing Granted January 2, 1934.
    Opinion on Rehearing Filed January 23, 1934.
    
      Van C. Swearingen, for Plaintiff in Error;
    J. W. Watson, Jr., Mitchell D. Price & Charles W. Zaring and Robert S. Florence, for Defendant in Error.
   Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties', and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the s'aid judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Whitfield, Buford and Brown, J. J., concur.

Davis, C. J., and Ellis, J., dissent.

Davis, C. J.

(dissenting). — I think the plaintiff made a case sufficient to go to the jury on the question of implied, if not express, acceptance of the dedication of the street under such circumstances as to impute liability for failure to keep it in proper repair at the place where plaintiff was injured by falling on a defective portion of it.

On Rehearing.

Per Curiam.

On consideration of this case after rehearing granted, the Court is of the opinion that the amended declaration stated a cause of action and that under the issues joined the plaintiff presented sufficient evidence tending to sustain the issues in her behalf to warrant a denial of the motion for a directed verdict in favor of the defendant.

The judgment should, therefore, be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial. It is so ordered.

Reversed and remanded.

Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur.

Brown, J., dissents.  