LEONARD TAYLOR, APPELLANT,
v.
TOWN OF KISSIMMEE CITY, APPELLEE
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 dismissed an appeal because the appellant failed to file a writ of error, which is the required method for appealing a law case under the Revised Statutes. The court emphasized that appeals must follow prescribed procedures.
The appeal is not properly before this court because the appellant failed to sue out a writ of error as required by the Revised Statutes for appeals in cases at law. Therefore, the court lacks jurisdiction.
““And now, at chambers of the court aforesaid, comes the plaintiff by his attorneys, Bailey & Peeler, and applies for and enters his appeal from the judgment herein rendered against him to the Supreme Court of the State of Florida, to be held at Tallahassee on the-day of January, A. D. 1892, (1893).”
This quote shows the appellant's attempt to initiate an appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLeonard Taylor filed a trespass action against the Town of Kissimmee City. After demurrers were sustained to his original and amended declarations, th…
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.
Mabry, C. J.:
In March, 1892, Leonard Taylor commenced an action at law in trespass for damages against the town of Kissimmee City, a municipal corporation under the laws of this State, and filed his declaration on the rule day iu April, 1892. After demurrer sustained to the declaration, an amended one was filed on the first of August, 1892, to which a demurrer was likewise sustained, and plaintiff; declining to further amend, the suit was dismissed at his cost.
On the day on which the last demurrer was sustained and the suit dismissed (September 23d, 1892). the following paper appears to have been filed in the cause, viz.: “And now, at chambers of the court aforesaid, comes the plaintiff by his attorneys, Bailey & Peeler, and applies for and enters his appeal from the judgment herein rendered against him to the Supreme Court of the State of Florida, to be held at Tallahassee on the-day of January, A. I). 1892, (1893).
“Sept. 23, ’92. Bailey & Peelek.”
The error assigned is that the court improperly sustained the demurrer to the amended" declaration. ' The case is submitted on brief by counsel for Leonard Taylor, but no brief is filed in behalf of the town, though its counsel joined issue on the assignment of error. The judgment here sought to be reviewed was rendered ' in September, 1892, after the Revised Statutes went into effect, and by section 1262 it is provided that “all proceedings to procure review by an appellate court of the proceedings of a lower court in cases at law shall be by writ of error, except in cases where certiorari or prohibition shall lie, or where it shall be otherwise expressly provided.” The present case comes within no exception to the general provision, and as no writ of error has been sued out on the judgment, the case will have to be dismissed for want of jurisdiction over the subject-matter. State vs. Mitchell, 29 Fla. 302, 10 South. Rep. 746; Knight vs. Towles, 32 Fla. 473, 14 South. Rep. 91.
An order dismissing the suit will be entered.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- State v. Mitchell, 29 Fla. 302 (Fla. 1892)
- Knight & Knight v. Towles, 32 Fla. 473 (Fla. 1893)