IDA SWAIN, ROWENA CARY, THEODOSIA E. DOSHER, MAGGIE PIVER, ETTA WEST AND JOHN R. REGISTER AS EXECUTOR OF THE LAST WILL AND TESTAMENT OF JOHN PRIGGE, DECEASED, APPELLANTS,
v.
THE LONDON AND LANCASHIRE FIRE INSURANCE COMPANY, A CORPORATION, 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 rejected the appellee's motion to dismiss an appeal on jurisdictional grounds, holding that the appeal entry's language designating the return day as 'to the January Term, A.D. 1905' was sufficiently clear and certain to confer jurisdiction, even without explicitly stating 'the first day of the term.'
The court held that the appeal entry was sufficient. When an appeal is entered to a particular term without specification of a particular day, it is understood to mean the first day of that term. The form of the statement is immaterial so long as language is used which clearly conveys that idea.
“The return day must be * * * to the first day of * * * * the next succeeding term of this court after the entry of appeal”
The court's prior holding in Garrison v. Parsons establishing the requirement for designation of return day
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn appeal was entered in July 1904 seeking to review a decree rendered prior to that date. The appeal entry designated the return day as 'to the Janua…
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.
Carter, J.
The appellee moves to dismiss this appeal upon the ground, among others, that the return day is not designated with sufficient certainty in the entry of appeal, so that the record of such entry will give this court jurisdiction over the person of the appellee. The entry states that the appeal is taken “to the January Term, A. D. 1905, of the Supreme Court of the State of Florida.” This language means that the appeal is taken to the first day of the January term as no particular day of the term is mentioned (Nicholls v. Marshall, 10 La.
O. S. 110; Hare v. Niblo, 4 Leigh (Va.) 359; Gas Company v. Wheeling, 7 W. Va. 22), and.as thus construed it is sufficient, as the appeal was entered and recorded in July, 1904, and seeks to review a decree rendered prior to that date. In Garrison v. Parsons, 41 Fla. 143, 25 South. Rep. 336, we said: “The return day must be * * * to the first day of * * * * the next succeeding term of this court after the entry of appeal,” and it is argued that this language requires an express declaration in the entry’that the appeal is taken to the first day of the term. We "think it must appear from the recorded entry, that the appeal is taken to the first day of the term, but the' form of the statement is immaterial so long as language is used which clearly conveys that idea. The language here used is suf ficient for that purpose and there is no inconsistency between the prfesent decision and the ruling in the case referred to.
Without further discussion of the motion, we are of opinion that it should be denied and it will be so ordered.
Whitfield. C. J., and Taylor; Hocker and Shackle-ford, JJ., concur. Cockrell, J., being disqualified, took no part in the decision. •
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Griffith v. Henderson, 52 Fla. 507 (Fla. 1906)…Court of Florida, at its term beginning on the second Tuesday of June, A. D. 1906.” This language makes the appeal returnable to the first day of the June term, which by law begins on the second Tuesday in June. Swain v. London & Lan. Fire Ins. Co., 49 Fla. 397, 38 South. Rep. 3. The second Tuesday of June 1906, was the 12th day of the month, and only 26 days from May 17th, the date of the entry of the appeal. The appellee lias appeared in this court by filing briefs on the merits a nd has made no motion t…
Authorities Cited
- Garrison v. Parsons, 41 Fla. 143 (Fla. 1899)