Buck v. All Parties, Etc.

• Decision Date: 20 June 1923
• Citation: 86 Fla. 86,97 So. 313
• Parties: BUCK v. ALL PARTIES, etc.
• Court: Florida Supreme Court

97 So. 313

86 Fla. 86

BUCK v. ALL PARTIES, etc.

Florida Supreme Court

June 20, 1923

Suit by J. F. Buck against all parties claiming interest in property involved as heirs under Colin Mitchel, deceased, and others. From the decree, complainant appeals. On motion to amend entry of appeal.

Motion denied, and appeal dismissed.

Syllabus by the Court

SYLLABUS

No jurisdiction on appeal acquired where entry of appeal fails to describe appellees. Where, in an entry of appeal, neither the title nor the body contains sufficient description of the persons against whom the appeal is taken, the appellate court acquires no jurisdiction of the persons against whom the appeal is taken.

Appeal must be dismissed where entry of appeal fails to sufficiently describe appellees. Where there is a defective entry of appeal, in that the persons against whom the appeal is taken are not sufficiently described to constitute notice to them that an appeal has been taken definitely against them, and they do not appear in the appellate court either in person or by their attorneys, the appeal shall be dismissed.

Chancery appeals must be taken within six months of order after entry of order appealed from. All appeals in chancery, whether from final decrees or from interlocutory orders, are required to be taken within six months after the entry of the order or decree appealed from.

Appellate court acquires no jurisdiction of appeal taken more than six months after entry thereof. When an appeal in a cause is attempted to be taken from a final decree more than six months after the entry of such decree, the appellate court acquires no jurisdiction of the cause.

Amendment of entry of appeal bringing in new parties cannot be allowed after time for taking appeal. The amendment of an entry of appeal by bringing in new parties appellant or appellee is in effect an entry of appeal as to such new parties, and such amendment cannot be allowed after the time allowed by law for taking the appeal.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Franklin County; E. C Love, Judge.

COUNSEL

E Tillman Davis, of Tallahassee, for appellant.

OPINION

ELLIS, J.

The appellant exhibited his bill in chancery in the circuit court for Franklin county on the 2d day of May, 1921, against 'all parties claiming interest in the property involved as heirs, devisees, grantees or other claimant, under the following named persons deceased, to wit: Colin Mitchel Robert Mitchel, Peter Mitchel, and John Carnochan, individually, and as trustees for creditors of Carnochan & Mitchel, Thomas Vermilya, William Calder, Richard Carnochan, James Innerarity, Benjamin Marshall, Benjamin W. Rogers, John McNish, John Graham, John P. Williamson, Stephen Cambreling, and Abel T. Anderson, trustees, Lewis Curtis and Nathaniel Thurston, individually and as trustees of the Apalachicola Land Company, George Garr, Andrew S. Garr, Jack Richards, Charles M. Harris, Abrahm Harmans, Frederick Constant, Kountze Bros., Augustus Kountze; all of whose names, ages, and residences are unknown to complainant. And against J. B. Rider and Cecelia McElroy of Springfield, Ill., and against all parties claiming interest otherwise whose names, ages, and residences are unknown to the complainant.' And praying that the complainant be decreed to be the owner in fee simple of certain lands described in the bill, all situate, lying, and being in Franklin county, including the east half of southeast quarter, and southwest quarter of southeast quarter, of section 9, and all section 16, in township 7 south, range 7 west; and that certain deeds be declared null and void as constituting a cloud upon the complainant's title.

There was an answer by a guardian appointed for the unknown, absent defendants, and orders made appointing examiners to take testimony.

On final hearing the chancellor rendered a decree in favor of the complainants granting the relief prayed for, except as to the east half of the southeast quarter, and southwest quarter of the southeast quarter, of section 9, and all of section 16 in township 7 south, range 7 west, as to which lands the prayer of the bill was denied. The decree was rendered the 4th day of February, 1922, and recorded on the 6th day of the same month.

On the 10th day of February, 1922, the complainant, by his solicitor, entered his appeal to the Supreme Court of this state. Neither in the caption nor in the body of the entry of appeal were the parties defendant described with the same particularity as they were described in the bill of complaint and in the final decree. In the entry of appeal the title of the case was given as follows:

'J. F. Buck, Complainant, v. All Parties claiming interest in the property involved, as heirs, devisees, grantees or other claimants, under Colin Mitchel et als., deceased or otherwise, Defendants.'

In the body of the entry of appeal there is no description of the defendants, but the statement is made that J. F. Buck, the complainant in the above-styled cause, enters his appeal to the Supreme Court from the final decree rendered in said cause on the 4th of February, 1922.

In the case of Garrison v. Parsons, 41 Fla. 143, 25 So 336, this court speaking through Mr. Justice Carter said that the statute, chapter 4528, Laws 1897, does not prescribe the form of the entry or notice of appeal which it requires to be recorded, but its object being to substitute for the former practice of giving personal notice by citation or in open court, a species of constructive notice by recording upon a public record the notice or entry of appeal, it clearly contemplates that the record of the notice of appeal in the chancery order book shall be sufficiently full and explicit to advise the appellate court, as well as parties entitled to notice, that an appeal has been...