MATTIE MAY PEASE, A WIDOW, PETITIONER,
v.
MAUDE D. MCELROY, A WIDOW, AND W. B. DOWLING, RESPONDENTS
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 petition to review a circuit court judgment for costs, clarifying its prior order to allow the recovery of interest as a cost. The court reversed the circuit court's judgment and directed it to enter proper orders for interest and costs.
Yes, interest can be recovered as an element of cost. The prior order was not intended to disallow such recovery.
“It appears that the circuit judge reluctantly concluded that our previous order in this cause dated June 15, 1955, dismissing a petition for writ of certiorari and denying a motion for additional attorney's fees and damages was susceptible of the construction that a certain item representing interest could not be recovered by petitioner as an element of cost. Such was not our intention.”
Explains the circuit court's misinterpretation of the Supreme Court's prior order regarding the recovery of interest as a cost.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePetitioner Mattie May Pease sought to review a circuit court judgment that she believed incorrectly excluded interest from recoverable costs. The circ…
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.
[*852] PER CURIAM.
Petitioner, Mattie May Pease, seeks in this court to review a judgment for costs. It appears that the circuit judge reluctantly concluded that our previous order in this cause dated June 15, 1955, dismissing a petition for writ of certiorari and denying a motion for additional attorney’s fees and damages was susceptible of the construction that a certain item representing interest could not be recovered by petitioner as an element of cost. Such was not our intention.
It is therefore ordered that the petition of Mattie May Pease be, and it is hereby, granted and the judgment of the circuit court is reversed with directions to enter such orders allowing interest and costs in this cause as that court should deem proper. DREW, C. J., and THOMAS, ROBERTS and THORNAL, JJ., concur.