F. T. BAKER
v.
W. W. FRICK, SHERIFF, INDIAN RIVER COUNTY, AND GEORGE S. SALES
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.
This case concerns whether a court of equity can enjoin a sheriff from executing a writ of possession on the wrong property. The court held that a court of law has the power to correct such errors, making resort to equity unnecessary unless independent equities exist.
A court of law has the power to correct errors in the execution of its process, including writs of possession, when the sheriff attempts to apply them to property not covered by the judgment. Therefore, a court of equity need not intervene unless independent equities exist.
“A Circuit Judge under Section 4516 C. G. L., 2829 R. G. S., has full power either in term time or vacation to correct, restrain and control the process of a court of law, including a writ of habere facias possessionem, including the manner in which it is being executed, and no resort is necessary to a court of chancery in such cases, unless the necessity therefor arises from independent equities apart from the process.”
Establishes the inherent power of a court of law to control its own process and execution.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant sought an injunction to prevent the sheriff from executing a writ of possession against the wrong property, which was not described in t…
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 Ejectment cases and more on FLexlaw
— This is an appeal from a final decree dismissing a bill for injunction brought by appellant as sole complainant in the court below. It appears from the allegations of the bill that the object of the complaint was to have the Sheriff of Indian River County enjoined from proceeding with the execution of a certain writ of habere facias possessionem issued on a judgment rendered in an ejectment suit wherein one George S. Dales was plaintiff and appellant F. T. Baker was one of the defendants. The contention of the appellant is that injunctive relief should have been granted because the sheriff had attempted to execute the writ against the party named in it by applying it to the wrong property and not the property actually described in the judgment in ejectment. The court dismissed the bill for want of equity and dissolved a temporary injunction that had been granted thereon.
In City of Coral Gables v. Hopkins, 107 Fla. 778, 144 Sou. Rep. 385, it was held by us that a court of law may, ■on motion, set aside a levy of an execution on property not subject to seizure, when all the interested parties are before *766the court. We think the same principle holds good where it is claimed that a court’s executive officer is wrongfully proceeding to execute its writ of habere facias possessionem by ejecting the defendant named in it from land which the writ does not legally describe nor cover.
A Circuit Judge under Section 4516 C. G. L., 2829 R. G. S., has full power either in term time or vacation to correct, restrain and control the process of a court of law, including a writ of habere facias possessionem, including the manner in which it is being executed, and no resort is necessary to a court of chancery in such cases, unless the necessity therefor arises from independent equities apart from the process. Robinson v. Yong, 8 Fla. 350; Budd v. Long, 13 Fla. 288; Barnett v. Hickson, 52 Fla. 457, 41 Sou. Rep. 606. So the dismissal of the bill involved in this case was correct.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- City of Coral Gables v. Hepkins, 107 Fla. 778 (Fla. 1932)
- Bion H. Barnett v. Hickson, 52 Fla. 457 (Fla. 1906)
- Robinson v. Terrell H. Yon and others, 8 Fla. 350 (Fla. 1859)
- Josiah T. Budd v. Wm. Ryal Long, 13 Fla. 288 (Fla. 1869)