R. L. WALL ET UX., APPELLANTS,
v.
J. H. SHELLEY, SHERIFF, ET AL., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's decision to dissolve an injunction and sustain a demurrer. The appellants failed to file a brief or assignment of errors, leading the court to consider the case abandoned.
Yes, the injunction should be dissolved and the demurrer sustained because the appellants abandoned their appeal by failing to file a brief or assignment of errors.
“There is here neither assignment of error nor brief of counsel on the part of appellants, and we consider the case as entirely abandoned by them.”
Establishes the basis for the court's decision to affirm.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants leased a hotel to Coxe and wife, who fell behind on rent. Appellants obtained a distress warrant, and the sheriff seized personal property.…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Dissolution Of Injunction cases and more on FLexlaw
Mabry, C. J.:
The appellants filed a bill against J. H. Shelley, as •sheriff of Putnam county, and M. I. Coxe, for the purpose of enjoining the sheriff from setting aside certain personal properly claimed by Coxe as exempt to him as the head of a family residing in this State, and which had been seized by virtue of a distress warrant issued at the instance of appellants against Coxe and •wife. The bill shows that appellants had rented to 'Coxe and wife a hotel situated in Palatka, Florida, for .a specified money rental, and that being in arrear for rent due under the lease a distress warrant was issued, and personal property found on the premises was-seized; that the sheriff proposed on the application of Coxe to set aside the property seized as exempt to him under the Constitution and laws of the State as the head of a family and residing in this State. It is conceded that Coxe was the head of a family residing in this State, and did not have a thousand dollars’ worth of personal property, including that seized under the distress warrant. A preliminary injunction was granted, and subsequently the bill was demurred to and a motion made to dissolve the injunction. The injunction was dissolved and the demurrer sustained, from which decisions an appeal was entered.
There is here neither assignment of error nor brief of counsel on the part of appellants, and we consider the case as entirely abandoned by them. Under this view we will affirm the decree appealed from (Clarke vs. Southern Express Co., 33 Fla. 617, 15 South. Rep. 252; Thomas vs. State, 36 Fla. 109, 18 South. Rep. 331), and an order will be entered accordingly.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hoodless v. Jernigan, 46 Fla. 213 (Fla. 1903)…outh. Rep. 336; Armstrong, Cator & Co. v. Glenn, 34 Fla. 387, 16 South. Rep. 279; Hayes v. Todd, 34 Fla. 233, 15 South. Rep. 752; Lambright v. State, 34 Fla. 564, 16 South. Rep. 582; Thomas v. State, 36 Fla. 109, 18 South. Rep. 331; Wall v. Shelley, 36 Fla. 357, 18 South. Rep. 856; Charles v. State, 36 Fla. 691, 18 South. Rep. 369; Camp Bros. v. Hall, 39 Fla. 535, 22 South. Rep. 792; Porter v. Parslow, 39 Fla. 50, 21 South. Rep. 574; Maloy v. State, 39 Fla. 432, 22 South. Rep. 719; Holland v. State, 39 Fla…
-
Betts Naval Stores Co. v. Whitton, 71 Fla. 348 (Fla. 1916)…ited upon page 308 of 6 Federal Statutes Annotated. We call attention to the fact that Laura Warren also entered her appeal from the final decree, but has filed no brief in this court and her appeal may be considered abandoned. See Wall v. Shelley, 36 Fla. 357, 18 South. Rep. 856. [*352] The decree must be affirmed. Taylor, C. J., and Cockrell and Ellis, JJ., concur. Whitfield, J., absent on account of illness.…
Authorities Cited
- Thomas v. State, 36 Fla. 109 (Fla. 1895)
- Clarke v. The S. Express Co., 33 Fla. 617 (Fla. 1894)