Davidson v. Bezant
| Decision Date | 28 March 1931 |
| Citation | 101 Fla. 1296,132 So. 488 |
| Parties | DAVIDSON v. BEZANT. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Error to Circuit Court, Marion County; W. S. Bullock, Judge.
Suit between W. M. Davidson and Henry R. Bezant. Judgment was entered below, and Davidson brings error.
Writ of error dismissed.
Syllabus by the Court.
Chapter 12019, Acts of 1927, providing that any motion, pleading document, or other matter exhibited only by the bill of exceptions when it should have been exhibited by the record shall be considered by the appellate court with the same force and effect as if it had been exhibited in its proper place in the transcript, provided the same appears in the transcript so that it may be definitely identified by the appellate court and so exhibited as to import authenticity does not dispense with the requirement that a complete assignment of errors to be relied on in the appellate court shall be filed, either under section 4633, C. G. L., section 2916, R. G. S., or made a part of the transcript of the record as contemplated by special rule 2 governing the making up of transcripts of records by clerks of the circuit court in civil cases.
The office of an assignment of error, which is in the nature of a pleading in this court by the plaintiff in error or appellant, is not only to inform the appellate court of the exact complaint against rulings, whereby, if the complaint be sustained, a judgment or decree may be changed or reversed but is to inform the defendant in error or appellee of the precise errors relied upon, in order that such defendant in error or appellee may take proper steps, or give proper directions in his own behalf, for making up a sufficient transcript of the record to exhibit to the court what might otherwise be insufficiently shown.
A complete failure to comply with the rules of court, or the statute, leaves the cause here without an assignment of errors such as is required to secure a proper review of the judgment complained of, and the writ of error must accordingly be dismissed.
COUNSEL W. E. Smith, of Ocala, for plaintiff in error.
Hampton & Greene, of Ocala, and Zach H. Douglas, of Gainesville, for defendant in error.
In this case the plaintiff in error filed with the judge an assignment of errors as a guide for making up the bill of exceptions, but did not file his complete assignment of errors to be relied on in the appellate court with the clerk of circuit court as a guide for making up the transcript, as required by special rule 2 of the Circuit Court Rules.
Neither did he serve upon the opposite party, or his attorney, a copy of his complete assignment of errors, or give notice he would rely in the appellate court upon the assignments presented to the judge as a guide for making up the bill of exceptions, and that the transcript would be made thereon.
No assignment of errors has been filed in this court within three days after the filing of the transcript here, as contemplated by section 4633, Comp. Gen. Laws.
This case is consequently before this court without any assignment of errors at all, except the assignment of errors presented to the judge as a guide for making up the bill of exceptions and such assignment of errors only appears in the transcript as a part of such bill of exceptions.
Motion to dismiss the writ of error for want of a proper assignment of errors has been made by defendant in error, who shows by his motion the facts...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
H. E. Wolfe Const. Co. Inc. v. Ellison
... ... validly entered and correctly arrived at by due course of ... legal procedure. Davidson v. Bezant, 101 Fla. 1296, ... 132 So. 488; St. Andrews Bay Lumber Co. [127 Fla ... 822] v. Bernard, 106 Fla. 235, 143 So. 160; ... Streeter ... ...
-
Morrison v. C. J. Jones Lumber Co., 32927
...up a sufficient transcript of the record to exhibit to the court what might otherwise be insufficiently shown.' Davidson v. Bezant, 101 Fla. 1296, 132 So. 488 (1931). Failure of the respondents to amend their assignments or their briefs after the entry of the order striking assignments of e......
-
Ogden Trucking Co. v. Heller Bros. & Co., 60-367
...judgment because its entry was not assigned as error. St. Andrews Bay Lumber Co. v. Bernard, 106 Fla. 235, 143 So. 160; Davidson v. Bezant, 101 Fla. 1296, 132 So. 488. Approximately one year after the date of the partial summary judgment on liability the plaintiff served and filed a motion,......
- Miami Bond & Mortgage Co. v. Bell