
    KATIE L. DINGMAN, a widow, by her next friend, B. D. BRADDOCK, v. J. A. ARD, CORA LEE ARD, his wife, et al.
    33 So. (2nd) 718
    January 30, 1948
    January Term, 1948
    Division A
    
      J. Ollie Edmunds, for appellant.
    
      Katz & Katz, for J. A. Ard and Cora Lee Ard, his wife, and John Allen Tatem and Vernall Hazel Tatem, his wife, and Rogers, Towers and Bailey and Elmer Norton for George L. Whitley and Ida E. Whitley, his wife, appellees.
   PER CURIAM:

On appeal here we are requested to reverse for enumerated reasons the decree of the Chancellor, which, as shown by a careful study of the record, appears to have been based largely on disputes and conflicts in the -evidence. We have given all the testimony appearing in the transcript careful consideration ; the briefs filed in the cause have been read, and the authorities cited examined. It is our view, and we so hold, that we are not justified, as a matter of law, in interfering with the decree appealed from and accordingly the same is affirmed. See Travis v. Travis, 81 Fla. 309, 87 So. 762; Webb v. Webb, 145 Fla. 267, 199 So. 343; Windham v. Windham, 152 Fla. 362, 11 So. (2nd) 797.

THOMAS, C. J., TERRELL, CHAPMAN and SEBRING, JJ., concur.  