MINNIE C. COLLINS AND HER HUSBAND W. E. COLLINS, APPELLANTS,
v.
W. C. BRIGGS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE

Fla. | 1929-09-17
Terrell, C. J., and Brown, J., concur., Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
98 Fla. 422 Florida Supreme Court (1929) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 123 So. 833
Cited by 16 cases

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court affirmed an order overruling a demurrer to a mortgage foreclosure bill. The court held that when a demurrer raises specific attacks without argument, the order should be affirmed, and that a mortgage assigned by notes to a holder passes valid security interest even without formal written assignment of the mortgage itself.


Holding

The order overruling the demurrer is affirmed. When a demurrer raises specific attacks without argument on appeal, the order overruling it should be affirmed. When promissory notes secured by a mortgage are assigned, the security interest follows to the assignee even without a written assignment of the mortgage, as all covenants designed to secure the debt inure to the benefit of the holders of the notes.


Key Quotes

“the rule applicable alike to pleadings at law or in equity is that when an assignment of error is based upon an order overruling a demurrer to a declaration the plaintiff in error is confined to grounds stated in the demurrer and argued on appeal, unless the declaration wholly fails to state a cause of action”

Establishes the procedural rule governing appeals of overruled demurrers

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

In May 1924, Minnie and W.E. Collins executed a mortgage to Leslie Bond & Mortgage Company (as trustee) to secure a $4,500 debt evidenced by twelve pr…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Ellis, J.

Ellis, J.

is an appeal from an order overruling a demurrer to a bill to foreclose a mortgage lien upon a certain lot in Miami. In May, 1924, Minnie Collins and her husband W. E. Collins executed the mortgage to secure the payment of a debt of $4,500. due by them to the Leslie Bond & Mortgage Company as trustee. The debt was evidenced by twelve promissory notes each bearing-date May 15, 1924, with interest from date at 8 per centum per annum. The mortgage was duly recorded.

In January, 1925, the Leslie Bond and Mortgage Company assigned the notes and mortgage to Avery C. Smith and in July, 1927, Smith and’ his wife assigned the notes and mortgage to the complainant W. C. Briggs, Inc., a Florida corporation, which in August of that year exhibited its bill in the Circuit Court for Dade County against Minnie Collins and her husband W. E. Collins and May Cotton and her husband Ernest Cotton to foreclose the mortgage lien.

Mrs. Cotton and her husband were made parties defendant because as it was alleged in the bill Collins and wife agreed in September, 1925, to convey the mortgaged premises to Mrs. Cotton and her husband. Summons was served upon Mr. Collins and other defendants and the Collins’ demurred to the bill. The demurrer was overruled and they appealed. The demurrer does not attack the bill generally for lack' of equity but does attack it specifically in nine points, none of which are argued. In such case the order appealed from should be affirmed.

The rule applicable alike to pleadings at law or in equity is that when an assignment' of error is based upon an order overruling-a demurrer to a declaration the plaintiff in error is confined to grounds stated in the demurrer and argued on appeal, unless the declaration wholly fails to state a cause of action. See DeFuniak Springs v. Perdue, 69 Fla. 326, 68 So. R. 234; Groover v. Hammond, 73 Fla. 1155, 75 So. R. 857; West Palm Beach v. Ryder, 73 Fla. 558, 74 So. R. 603.

. While the demurrer attacked the whole bill by pointing out certain defects claimed to exist, it nevertheless operated as an admission that all the allegations which were well pleaded, were true. The allegations of the bilí of complaint may not be said to constitute a model of good pleading yet under the allegations sufficiently made and admitted a case entitling the complainant to the relief prayed may be made by appropriate and sufficient evidence.

It is alleged that the Leslie Bond & Mortgage Company assigned the. mortgage and notes to-Avery C. Smith. The mortgage was-made to the Leslie Company as trustee but neither the bill nor the mortgage definitely names the cestuis que trustent. From the general tenor of the mortgage .it appears that the corporation was merely selected by the mortgagors as one in whose name the security should repose while the notes might be held by different persons. The Company was authorized to sell the notes without further consent from the mortgagor. When the notes were all assigned to Smith the security followed even without an assignment of it in writing. The nominal trustee became no longer even a naked trustee. All the covenants designed for the security of the debt inured to the benefit of the holders of it.

We think that there Is no merit in the assignment of error, so-the order is affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Brown, J., concur. Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Johns v. Gillian, 134 Fla. 575 (Fla. 1938)
    …of it, the mortgage in equity passes as an incident of the debt, unless there be some plain and clear agree [*581] ment to the contrary, if that be the intention of the parties. Jones, on Mortgages, Vol. 2, Sec. 1033; Collins v. W. C. Briggs, Inc., 98 Fla. 422, 123 So. 833; Miami Mortgage & Guaranty Co. v. Drawdy, 99 Fla. 1092, 127 So. 323. The renewal note signed by Pearl M. Brown alone was, of course, void. Although an action may not be maintained on the note itself, it can be used in the foreclosure p…
  • Chem. Residential Mortg. v. Rector, 742 So. 2d 300 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998)
    …oncur. . See, Warren v. Seminole Bond & Mortgage Co., 127 Fla. 107, 172 So. 696 (1937); Johns v. Gillian, 134 Fla. 575, 184 So. 140 (Fla.1938); American Central Ins. Co. v. Whitlock, 122 Fla. 363, 165 So. 380 (1936); Collins v. W.C. Briggs, Inc., 98 Fla. 422, 123 So. 833 (1929); Drake Lumber Co. v. Semple, 100 Fla. 1757, 130 So. 577 (1930).…
  • Margiewicz v. Terco Props. OF Miami Beach, Inc., 441 So. 2d 1124 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
    …is assigned, the mortgage follows the note into the hands of the assignee. Manufacturers’ Trust Co. v. People’s Holding Co., 110 Fla. 451, 149 So. 5 (1933); Baker v. Rowe, 102 Fla. 622, 136 So. 681 (1931); Collins v. W.C. Briggs, Inc., 98 Fla. 422, 123 So. 833 (1929). See also Davis v. West, 114 So. 2d 703 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959). Reversed and remanded.…

Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw