Credit Indus. Co. v. Remark Chemical Co.
| Decision Date | 13 October 1953 |
| Citation | 67 So.2d 540 |
| Parties | CREDIT INDUSTRIAL CO., Limited, v. REMARK CHEMICAL CO., Inc. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Berger & Snetman, Miami, for appellant.
Feibelman & Friedman, Miami, for appellee.
The plaintiff in the lower court (appellant here) prayed for a decree defining its position with reference to the potential effect, if any, of Chapter 28170, Laws of Florida, Acts of 1953, F.S.A. § 608.01 et seq., upon the present inability of a corporation to interpose the defense of usury with particular reference to a written contract for a financing enterprise, which required, among other things, the defendant corporation to pay to plaintiff interest at a rate in excess of ten per cent per annum. The defendant admitted the material allegations of the complaint and asserted that the contract was to its advantage. Thereupon the plaintiff filed a motion for a summary decree upon the ground that there was no genuine issue as to any material fact.
The Circuit Court granted plaintiff's motion for summary decree by the entry of a final order wholly favorable to plaintiff and fully consistent with the prayer of the complaint. From this final order plaintiff has appealed.
Appellant has filed six so-called 'Assignments of Error.' A typical example is the first assignment reading as follows:
The record here plainly shows that appellant complains of no irregularity in the action of the court below but instead seeks affirmance of orders wholly favorable to it. Even if, under the facts alleged in the complaint, relief is not precluded by the recent decision in Ervin v. City of North Miami Beach, Fla., 66 So.2d 235, this appeal must be dismissed for the reasons set out hereafter.
The mode of review or proceedings for declaratory relief is no different than in other actions. Section 87.06, Florida Statutes 1951, F.S.A., reads as follows:
The general rule on appeal to review proceedings of an inferior court is that a party to the cause may appeal only from a decision in some respect adverse to him. Witt v. Baars, 36 Fla. 119, 18 So. 330; Peterson v. State ex rel....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
City of Coral Gables v. Puiggros
...below. Since that judgment was wholly in his favor, such a cross-appeal, as a technical matter, does not lie. Credit Industrial Co. v. Re-Mark Chemical Co., 67 So.2d 540 (Fla.1953). We have, however, considered the briefs filed on behalf of the "cross-appellant" as supplements to his answer......
-
North Shore Bank v. Town of Surfside
...and granted completely the relief sought. This appeal must be, and therefore is, dismissed on the authority of Credit Industrial Co. v. Remark Chemical Co., Fla.1953, 67 So.2d 540. Boehrer, in his appeal, urges that Chapter 75, Florida Statutes 1953, F.S.A., affords an exclusive method of d......
-
Van Tran v. Deutsche Bank Nat'l Trust Co., No. 3D19-2215
...the motion below. As the underlying judgment became final in late 2012, we dismiss his appeal. See generally Credit Indus. Co. v. Remark Chem. Co., 67 So. 2d 540, 541 (Fla. 1953) ("The general rule on appeal to review proceedings of an inferior court is that a party to the cause may appeal ......
-
INTER. LONGSHOREMEN'S ASSOC. v. Fisher
...Corp. Litigation, 614 F.2d 11 (1st Cir.1980).1 This appeal is dismissed because Appellant lacks standing. Credit Indust. Co., Ltd. v. Remark Chem. Co., Inc., 67 So.2d 540 (Fla.1953); Consolidated City of Jacksonville v. Buffkin, 768 So.2d 1253 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (dismissing appeal for lack......
-
Cross-appeals in civil cases.
...argue for affirmance on a separate ground that was not accepted by the trial court). (5) See Credit Indus. Co. v. Re-Mark Chem. Co., 67 So. 2d 540, 541 (Fla. 1953); City of Coral Gables v. Puiggros, 376 So. 2d 281, 284 n.4 (Fla. 3d D.C.A. (6) Other Florida decisions have held that the time ......