M. W. JOHNSON, S. P. STEED, AND RAFAEL RAMOS, PETITIONERS,
v.
EVARISTO FERNANDEZ, RESPONDENT
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 reviewed a writ of certiorari challenging a Circuit Court's reversal of county court orders granting a motion in arrest of judgment, a motion for new trial, and a motion to vacate and set aside a verdict. The Court held that a writ of error lies only to a final judgment or an order granting a new trial, and the Circuit Court therefore lacked jurisdiction to review the county court's interlocutory orders.
A writ of error lies only to a final judgment or to an order granting a new trial. The Circuit Court therefore lacked jurisdiction to review the county court's orders in arrest of judgment and to vacate and set aside the verdict and judgment, as these were interlocutory orders.
“A writ of error lies only to a final judgment or to an order granting a new trial.”
Establishes the jurisdictional limitation on writs of error, which is the core legal principle at issue in the case.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn action was brought on a constable's official bond in Hillsborough County county court by Evaristo Fernandez against M. W. Johnson (constable) and S…
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 Motion In Arrest Of Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, J.
From a transcript of the record sent here in response to a writ of certiorari issued from this court, it appears that an action was brought on a constable’s official bond in the county court for Hillsborough County by Evaristo Fernandez against M. W. Johnson, as constable of the 32nd Justice District of Hillsborough County, Florida, and S. P. Steed and Rafael Ramos as sureties; that the defendant,. M. W. Johnson, filed a demurrer going to the sufficiency of the declaration; that an entry of a judgment by default was made against the defendants, S. P. Seed and Rafael Ramos; that at a term of the county court a verdict and judgment for the plaintiff were rendered against S. P. Steed and Rafael Ramos; that the county court granted a motion in arrest of judg ment, and a motion for new trial and a motion to vacate and set aside the verdict and judgment. A writ of error was taken by the plaintiff to the Circuit Court, and on such writ of error the Circuit Court reversed the orders granting the three motions above mentioned and directed that a stated amended final judgment be entered by the county court.
A writ of error lies only to a final judgment or to an order granting a new trial. If the writ of error taken was authorized by law the Circuit Court had no jurisdiction to review the orders' of the county court, arresting the judgment and vacating the verdict and judgment theretofore entered in the cause. It is manifest that the county court granted the motions referred to in order that appropriate proceedings might be had in the cause as the law requires.
The judgment of the Circuit Court is quashed and the cause stands for further proceedings in the county court.
It is so ordered.
Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Ellis and West, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Nichols v. City OF Hialeah, 183 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)…aint was made. Crandall, Florida Common Law Practice (1928) § 472, p. 661. The modern practice allows a broader scope to the reviewing court upon petition for certiorari. McGee v. McGee, 156 Fla. 346, 22 So. 2d 788 (1945). Cf., Johnson v. Fernandez, 79 Fla. 508, 84 So. 381 (1920). Therefore, if the record before the circuit court was such as to afford a lawful basis for the court’s decision that there were procedural irregularities in the first hearing, it was not error for the circuit court to include in…