FRED T. LEY & CO., INC., A MASSACHUSETTS CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
EDWARD C. HILKER, 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.
Fred T. Ley & Co. appealed a judgment in favor of Edward C. Hilker, challenging the trial court's allowance of a plaintiff substitution and the use of a memorandum to refresh witness testimony. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed, finding the substitution proper and any error in admitting the memorandum harmless because the defendant itself later used the same witness to prove the amount owed.
The court held that the substitution of plaintiffs was proper because the defendant waived any objection by filing pleas to the amended declaration. Any error in admitting the memorandum to refresh testimony was harmless because the defendant itself subsequently used the same witness to prove the balance due, thereby establishing sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict.
“By the filing of such pleas, the defendant waived any objections to the substitution of one plaintiff for another.”
Establishes that the defendant's responsive pleading constituted a waiver of the substitution defense.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe original suit was filed by E. C. Hilker, Inc., a Florida corporation, against Fred T. Ley & Co., a Massachusetts corporation. After notice to the …
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 Refreshing Recollection cases and more on FLexlaw
This case comes before us on writ of error to the judgment of the Circuit Court for Palm Beach County in favor of the plaintiff below, defendant in error here.
Plaintiff in error states that there are three questions to be determined. The first question challenges the right of the plaintiff to substitute, after declaration is filed, a different sole plaintiff from the plaintiff in whose name the original suit was filed. The original suit was filed in the name of E. C. Hilker, Inc., a Florida Corporation, v. Fred T. Ley & Co., a Massachusetts Corporation.
Later the plaintiff filed motion for leave to amend its declaration by substituting Edward C. Hilker in the place and stead of the plaintiff E. C. Hilker, Inc., a Florida Corporation. The motion to amend was granted and amended declaration was filed, all of which was after notice to the defendant.
' Thereupon, the defendant filed its pleas to the declaration so amended. By the filing of such pleas, the defendant waived any objections to the substitution of one plaintiff for another.
The other two questions which plaintiff in error attempts to present are based upon the fact that a memorandum of account not shown to be the original entry and not kept by the plaintiff, the witness then testifying, was allowed to be used by the witness to refresh his memory. Timely ob*131jections were made to the use of such memorandum. Such objections were overruled and the memorandum was used.
Whether or not this constituted reversible error it is not necessary for us to determine because after this evidence had been admitted over the objections of the defendant the defendant voluntarily made the plaintiff its own witness and proceeded to prove by such witness the amount of the balance due from the defendant to the plaintiff, which amount so proven by the defendant using the plaintiff as its witness was entirely sufficient to sustain the verdict. By this procedure, the defendant rendered the error committed, if any, harmless.
For the reasons stated, the judgment should be affirmed and it is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, P. J., and BROWN and Bufoed, J. J., concur.
Davis, C. J., and Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.