NORFLEET HOLDING COMPANY, A CORPORATION, ORGANIZED AND DOING BUSINESS UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
WILL H. PRICE AND MATTIE L. PRICE, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES
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 granted a motion to quash proceedings in error, finding that the appeal lacked merit and was likely taken for delay. The court reviewed the record to determine if error lay, but did not delve into debatable questions.
The court held that error does not lie in the final decree, and therefore, the motion to quash the proceedings in error must be granted.
“These statutes vest courts of error with power to quash proceedings in error or an appeal in all cases in which error does not lie or when taken against good faith or merely for delay.”
Explains the statutory basis for the court's power to quash an appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceNorfleet Holding Company appealed a final decree entered in a foreclosure proceeding concerning a contract treated as a mortgage. Appellees filed a mo…
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 Final Decree cases and more on FLexlaw
This is a motion to quash “proceedings in error” as authorized by Section 2920 Revised General Statutes of 1920 (Section 4639 Compiled General Laws of 1927). Section 3173 Revised General Statutes of 1920 (Section 4967 Compiled General Laws of 1927) makes a *667like proceeding applicable to appeals in chancery. These statutes vest courts of error with power to quash proceedings in error or an appeal in all cases in which error does not lie or when taken against good faith or merely for delay.
To determine whether “error does not lie” or whether taken “against good faith or merely for delay” we make a cursory examination of the record but will not resolve doubtful or debatable questions nor will we examine authorities or arguments supporting counsel’s theory of the cause. Willey vs. Hoggson, 89 Fla. 446, 105 So. 126.
Appeal was taken from a final decree entered in a proceeding to foreclose a contract of purchase which by its terms was treated as a mortgage. An examination of the pleadings, the decree appealed from, and the assignments of error disclose that “error does not lie” so the motion to quash must be and is hereby granted.
Strum, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Brown and Buford,. J.J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Joseph T. Miller Constr. Co., Inc. v. Seymour H. Borak, 82 So. 2d 147 (Fla. 1955)…may be considered debatable. It does not examine authorities or arguments supporting counsel’s theory of the case, or resolve doubtful or debatable questions, to determine whether or' not the motion should be granted. Norfleet Holding Co. v. Price, 101 Fla. 666, 132 So. 643. Moreover, the moving party will not be heard, either orally or by brief, “for the - reason that the assignments of error must, on an examination of the record, be so wholly devoid of'merit as to require no argument on his part to show…
-
Crichlow v. The Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States, 105 Fla. 640 (Fla. 1932)…was filed here by appellants, appellee filed its motion under Section 4639 C. G. L., 2920 R. G. S., which provides for quashing proceedings in error when an appeal is taken against good faith and merely for delay. See Norfleet Holding Co. v. Price, 101 Fla. 666, 132 Sou. Rep. 643; Green v. Cook, 102 Fla. 837, 136 Sou. Rep. 454. This motion, being made by the appellee before the return day of the appeal, was accompanied by a complete transcript of the record in the court below, prepared and filed here by th…
-
Lake Region Hotel Co. v. Gollick, 108 Fla. 322 (Fla. 1933)…in support of their motion to dismiss the appeals as frivolous have negatived the idea that the appeals can be disposed of by [*323] this Court adversely to appellants, on a mere “cursory” examination of the record. Se Norfleet Holding Co. v. Price, 101 Fla. 666, 132 So. Rep. 643; Green v. Cook, 102 Fla. 837, 126 So. Rep. 454; Grand Lodge K. of P. v. Stroud, 107 Fla. 152, 144 So. Rep. 324. Motions to quash proceedings in error, or to dismiss appeals as frivolous, filed under Section 4639 C. G. L., 2920 R.…
Authorities Cited
- Willey v. W. J. Hoggson Corp., 89 Fla. 446 (Fla. 1925)
- Shuron Hester v. State, 312 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)