MUNICIPAL COURT IN AND FOR THE CITY OF CORAL GABLES, DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, CHARLES H. SPOONER AND LAWRENCE G. LALLY, AS THE JUDGES OF SUCH MUNICIPAL COURT, AND THE CITY OF CORAL GABLES, A MUNICIPALITY OF AND IN DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANTS,
v.
VINCENT C. GIBLIN, APPELLEE
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 appellate court dismissed an appeal because the assignments of error were too general and failed to specify the legal errors relied upon for reversal, adhering to established rules of appellate procedure.
No, the assignments of error were too general and failed to point out the specific legal errors relied upon for reversal, thus not complying with appellate rules.
“The appellee's motion to dismiss this appeal is predicated upon appellants' failure in its assignments of error to point out clearly and distinctly any alleged errors relied on for reversal.”
This quote establishes the basis for the appellee's motion to dismiss 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 intelligenceThe appellee filed a motion to dismiss the appeal, arguing that the appellants' assignments of error did not clearly and distinctly identify the error…
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 Assignments Of Error cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellee’s motion to dismiss this appeal is predicated upon appellants’ failure in its assignments of error to point out clearly and distinctly any alleged errors relied on for reversal.
This was an action in prohibition which resulted in a judgment awarding a peremptory writ. Prohibition has been classified as a common-law remedy. See State ex rel. Rheinauer v. Malone, 40 Fla. 129, 23 So. 575; Crill v. State Road Department, 96 Fla. 110, 117 So. 795. The appellants’ assignments of error are five in number. When viewed in their most favorable light, the assignments simply complain that the trial judge erred in entering the judgment. The assignments fail to point out the legal error occasioned by the entry of the judgment and, as stated by the Supreme Court of Florida in Stearns & Culver Lumber Co. v. Adams, 55 Fla. 401, 45 So. 847, such an assignment “ * * * is too general to be considered, as it is broad enough to cover the whole record and every feature of the trial.” 3.5, subd. c, F.A.R., 31 F.S.A. See Fawcett v. Weaver, 121 Fla. 245, 163 So. 561; Miami Investors Syndicate v. Johnnie & Mack, Inc., Fla.App.1958, 104 So.2d 617. Cf. Durrance v. First National Bank & Trust Company of Orlando, 116 Fla. 526, 156 So. 526.
The motion to dismiss is granted and this appeal is dismissed.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Gregg v. State Rd. Dep't of Fla., 140 So. 2d 328 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)…early insufficient as a matter of law under a long and uninterrupted line of decisions of the appellate courts of Florida, including, among many others, Bybee v. Stearn, 95 So. 2d 529 (Fla.1957), Municipal Court etc., City of Coral Gables v. Giblin, 126 So. 2d 285 (Fla. App.1961), and Hornsby v. Tingle, 134 So. 2d 540 (Fla.App.1961). Rule 3.5 of the Florida Appellate Rules, 31 F.S.A., is as follows: “a. Assignments of Error by Appel- ■ lant. Within 10 days after the notice of appeal has been filed, the appe…
-
Starkey v. Chew, 241 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)…ject to the instruction given; therefore the assignment directed to the instruction may not now be considered. Rule 1.470(b) RCP, 30 F.S.A. Appellant’s assignment four is insufficient. Municipal Court In and For Coral Gables v. Giblin, Fla.App.1961, 126 So. 2d 285; Gregg v. State Road Department, Fla.App.1962, 140 So. 2d 328. Appellant’s fifth assignment of error claims the court erred in the denial of post-trial motions. We have examined the record in the light of this assignment and the points raised on app…
-
Pearson v. State, 254 So. 2d 573 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…the court erred by failing to give a certain charge relating to the elements of the offense is rejected. That contention was without the support of an assignment of error thereon. See Municipal Court in and for Coral Gables v. Giblin, Fla.App.1961, 126 So. 2d 285. No request was made to the court to so charge, and no objection was made with regard thereto at trial. See Brown v. State, Fla.1968, 206 So. 2d 377, 384; Gibson v. State, Fla.App.1967, 194 So. 2d 19, 20. No error was committed by the trial court in…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Crill v. State Rd. Dep't of Fla., 96 Fla. 110 (Fla. 1928)
- The State of Fla. ex rel. Charles Rheinauer v. Malone, 40 Fla. 129 (Fla. 1898)
- The Stearns & Culver Lumber Co. v. Adams, 55 Fla. 401 (Fla. 1908)
- Fawcett v. Weaver, 121 Fla. 245 (Fla. 1935)
- Durrance v. First Nat'l Bank & Tr. Co. of Orlando, 116 Fla. 526 (Fla. 1934)
- Miami Invs. Syndicate, Inc. v. Johnnie & Mack, Inc., 104 So. 2d 617 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)