Adams v. Stringfellow
Decision Date | 23 February 1926 |
Citation | 91 Fla. 305,107 So. 633 |
Parties | ADAMS et al. v. STRINGFELLOW et al. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Rehearing Denied March 24, 1926.
Suit by Willie Adams Stringfellow and her husband against Dorthy Adams and others, to cancel a deed and for partition. From a judgment overruling the defendants' demurrer to the complaint, defendants appeal.
Affirmed.
Syllabus by the Court
Though allegations of bill are abstract and in nature of asserted conclusions, if, under allegations, case entitling complainant to relief as prayed can be made by appropriate and sufficient evidence, general demurrer to complaint should be overruled; complaint to cancel deed held good on general demurrer. Though the allegations of a bill of complaint be abstract and general and largely in the nature of asserted conclusions, yet if, under the allegations, a case entitling the complainant to relief as prayed can be made by appropriate and sufficient evidence, a general demurrer to the bill of complaint should be overruled.
Appeal from Circuit Court, Marion County; A. V Long, Judge.
H. M Hampton and Martin & Hocker, all of Ocala, for appellants.
Thomas W. Fielding and W. S. Broome, both of Gainesville, for appellees.
The appellees filed a bill of complaint in the circuit court of Marion county, against the appellants, who were the defendants in the court below, seeking to cancel and to have declared void a certain deed made by Dorthy C. Edwards, on the 12th day of March, 1919, to Dorthy Adams, a minor conveying certain valuable property located in the city of Ocala, Fla., to have the deed declared null and void, and praying partition of the property described in the deed referred to.
The allegations of the bill upon which the complainants based their claim and relief are as follows:
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Steigman v. Danese
...in Florida that a deed may be set aside because of undue influence exercised on the grantor by the grantee." Accord Adams v. Stringfellow, 91 Fla. 305, 107 So. 633 (Fla.1926); Pratt v. Carns, 80 Fla. 243, 85 So. 681 In the instant case, Count I of the complaint alleges: (1) a confidential r......
-
Bush v. Webb
... ... Watts, ... 73 Fla. 514, 74 So. 519; Dale v. Jennings, 90 Fla ... 234, 107 So. 175, 8th headnote; Adams v ... Stringfellow, 91 Fla. 305, 107 So. 633 ... Affirmed ... BUFORD, ... C.J., and ELLIS and BROWN, JJ, ... ...
- Davis v. State
- Hayman v. Mitchell
-
Business & commercial cases
...Florida that a deed may be set aside because of undue influence exercised on the grantor by the grantee.” Accord Adams v. Stringfellow , 107 So. 633 (Fla. 1926); Pratt v. Carns , 85 So. 681 (Fla. 1920). See Steigman v. Danese, 502 So.2d 463, 466 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987), rev. denied , 511 So.2d ......