
    Harold M. Warren, et al., v. Seminole Bond & Mortgage Co., et al.
    
    151 So. 291.
    Division B.
    Opinion Filed October 17, 1933.
    Rehearing Denied December 13, 1933.
    . James J. Marshall, for Appellant;
    
      Snedigar & Baya, for. Appellees.
   " Per Curiam.

In a suit, brought to foreclose a mortgage by the appellees against the appellants the defense of usury was interpos'ed in answer and in counter claim embraced in the answer.

The appellees were the original mortgagees.

The decree was in favor of the complainants.

We think the decree should be reversed on authority of the cases of McCullough v. Hill, 105 Fla. 680, 133 Sou. 846; Tucker v. Fouts, 73 Fla. 1215, 76 Sou. 130; Benson v. First Trust & Savings Bank, 105 Fla. 135, 142 Sou. 887. It is so ordered.

Reversed.

Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis arid Buford, J. J., concur.

Brown,, j., dissents.  