HOPE STRONG
v.
CITY OF WINTER PARK
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 dismissed a writ of error because the record lacked a final judgment. The court noted that a plaintiff's election to take a non-suit after a directed verdict motion, while permissible, must be followed by a proper judgment to be appealable.
No, the record does not contain a final judgment. Therefore, the writ of error must be dismissed.
“No judgment appears in the record, therefore the writ of error must be dismissed.”
The court's primary reason for dismissing the appeal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn an assumpsit action, after the plaintiff rested, the defendant moved for a directed verdict. The trial court indicated it would grant the motion. 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 Nonsuit cases and more on FLexlaw
A bill of exceptions taken in an action of assumpsit -states that:
“After having heard testimony for Plaintiff counsel for Plaintiff announced ‘Rest.’ Thereupon counsel for defendant moved for a directed verdict for defendant. After argument of counsel the Court indicated he would grant the motion. Whereupon counsel for plaintiff announced that plaintiff elected to take a ‘Non-Suit,’ and asked 90 days to prepare a Bill of Exceptions, and it was so ordered by the Court.”
No judgment appears in the record, therefore the writ of error must be dismissed. Mizell Live Stock Co. v. McCaskill, 57 Fla. 118, 49 So. 501; Dowling v. Weaver-Loughridge Lumber Co., 94 Fla. 1096, 114 So. 666. As to form of judgment on non-suit, see Spiker v. Hester, 101 Fla. 288, 135 So. 502.
*229Writ of error dismissed.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Teeeell and Bufoed, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Charlotte Cnty. v. Clay Chadwick, 102 Fla. 163 (Fla. 1931)
- Mizell Live Stock Co. v. The J. J. McCaskill Co., 57 Fla. 118 (Fla. 1909)