TAMPA BAY APARTMENT HOTEL COMPANY, A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
E. W. MONROSE, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
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 judgment, holding that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The court found no material errors of law or procedure that would warrant disturbing the verdict.
Yes, there was ample evidence to legally support the jury's verdict for the plaintiff. The appellate court found no material errors of law or procedure.
“There is ample evidence to afford a legal basis for the verdict found for the plaintiff on the issues as made, and as the evidence does- not so- preponderate against the verdict as to show the. jury, were not governed by the evidence, and no material error of law or procedure appearing, the verdict • will not be disturbed by the appellate court.”
This quote explains the court's reasoning for affirming the lower court's decision, emphasizing the sufficiency of evidence and lack of material errors.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff, E.W. Monrose, sued the Tampa Bay Apartment Hotel Company for $1,500, alleging the debt was for work done, materials furnished, money le…
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 Legal Error cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
The declaration herein is as follows: “E. W. Monr-ose, the plaintiff in the above entitled cause, by his undersigned attorneys, sues Tampa Bay Apartment Hotel Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Florida, the defendant, for that heretofore on June 14th, 1912, the defendant became and was indebted to the plaintiff in the sum of Fifteen Hundred Dollars.
“1st. For money payable by the defendant to the plaintiff for work done and materials furnished by plaintiff for the defendant at its request:
“2nd. Money lent by the plaintiff to the defendant. “3rd. And money paid by the plaintiff for the defendant at its request.
“Plaintiff avers that neither said sum of money nor any part thereon has been paid, but that the same remains wholly due, owing and unpaid from the defendant to the plaintiff.
“Wherefore, plaintiff sues apd claims Three Thousand Dollars, damages.” t
The defendant pleaded “that it never was indebted as alleged.” There was verdict and judgment for the plaintiff, and the defendant took writ of error. There is ample evidence to afford a legal basis for the verdict found for the plaintiff ón the issues as made, and as the evidence does-not so-preponderate against the verdict as to show the. jury, were not governed by the evidence, and no material error of law or procedure appearing, the verdict • will not be disturbed by the appellate court.
Judgment affirmed.
Browne, C. J., and .Taylor, Shackleford, Whitfield and Ellis concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (41 total)
-
Evins v. The Gainesville Nat'l Bank, 80 Fla. 84 (Fla. 1920)…the lien of an execution. An execution issued on a judgment, called a writ of fieri facias, is a lien upon the personal property of the defendant in .execution from the time such writ shall be delivered to the sheriff. Pasco v. Harley, 73 Fla. 819, 75 South. Rep. 30; Love v. Williams, 4 Fla. 126; Hunt v. Finegan, 11 Fla. 105; text 111; Kimball v. Jenkins, 11 Fla. 111, text 123. Lands and tenements, goods and chattels, equities of redemption in real and personal property, and stock in corporations, shall be sub…
-
Gulf Ref. Co. v. Ankeny, 102 Fla. 151 (Fla. 1931)…the homestead laws should be carried out in the liberal and beneficent spirit in which they were enacted, but at the same time great care should be taken to prevent them from becoming the instruments of fraud.” Pasco v. Harley, et al., 73 Fla. 819, 75 So. 30. Homestead real estate cannot be alienated except by deed or mortgage duly executed by husband and wife, where such relation exists, Thomas, et al. v. Craft, et al., 55 Fla. 842, 46 So. 594; but such homestead real estate may in whole [*154] or in…
-
Bessemer Props. v. Robert Howard Gamble et ux., 158 Fla. 38 (Fla. 1946)…rticle X, of the Constitution, relating to the homestead, should be liberally construed in the interest of the home, and that a homestead exemption extends to any right or interest the head of a family may hold in land. Pasco v. Harley, 73 Fla. 819, 75 So. 30; Hill v. First National Bank, 73 Fla. 1092, 75 So. 614; Milton v. Milton, 63 Fla. 533, 58 So. 718. There is no ques [*40] tion that Gamble was the head of a family and that his. contributions to his wife’s separate property gave him an equitable int…
Previewing 3 of 41 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence