Fullerton v. Clark

Citation194 So. 481,142 Fla. 200
PartiesFULLERTON v. CLARK.
Decision Date05 March 1940
CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida

Suit by William J. Fullerton against Byron Clark, Jr., as administrator of the estate of Miller J. Huggins, deceased to foreclose a mortgage. From an order denying complainant's petition for rehearing after entry of an order vacating a deficiency decree, complainant appeals. On appellee's motion to affirm the order appealed from.

Motion granted, and order affirmed. Appeal from Circuit Court, Pinellas County; John I. Viney, judge.

COUNSEL

Blanchard & Hoffman, of St. Petersburg, and W. G. Starry, of Tallahassee, for appellant.

Carey &amp Harrison, of St. Petersburg, for appellee.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

After the going down of the mandate pursuant to our opinion in re Clark v. Fullerton, 130 Fla. 150, 177 So. 851, the Circuit Court on November 19, 1938, entered its order as follows:

'A motion in writing having been duly presented to the Court requesting the entry of an appropriate order in this cause in compliance with the terms and provisions of the Supreme Court decisions heretofore rendered, on this the 1st day of February A. D. 1938, and it appearing to the Court that due notice of the hearing of said motion has been given to Messrs. Blanchard and Hoffman, attorneys for above named Plaintiff, and attorneys representing said Plaintiff and Byron Clark, Jr., as Executor of the Last Will and Testament and Estate of Miller J. Huggins, deceased, all being before the Court, and argument of said counsel having been made before the Court, and said cause having been duly considered, and the decisions of the Supreme Court dated February 1, 1937, and January 5, 1938, in this cause, and other decisions of the Supreme Court referred to in these two designated decisions also having been considered by the Court, and it further appearing to the Court that a mandate from the Supreme Court of the State of Florida in this cause was duly filed in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court of the Sixth Judicial Circuit of the State of Florida, on January 8, 1938, and recorded in Chancery Order Book No. 151, on page 340, in which mandate among other things it is ordered: 'The said decree of the Circuit Court be and the same is hereby reversed and the cause remanded, and further appropriate proceedings consistent with the opinions of this Court filed February 1, 1937, and January 5, 1938, (attached to and made a part of this mandate): It is further ordered by the Court that the Appellant do have and recover of and from the Appellee his costs by him in this behalf expended,' and this Court being advised of its judgment to be entered in the premises, it is, therefore, in accordance with the terms and provisions of said mandate and of the decisions of said Supreme Court, decreed, ordered and adjudged that the deficiency judgment heretofore entered by this Court in the sum of $16,745.35 against Byron Clark Jr., as Executor of the Last Will and Testament and Estate of Miller J. Huggins, deceased, in favor of William J. Fullerton, on the 15th day of December, A. D. 1934, and recorded in Chancery Order Book No. 120 at page 525 and 526 thereof in Chancery Case No. 16172, be and the same is hereby cancelled, vacated and annulled.
'Further ordered and adjudged that the remainder of the order confirming the sale, herein referred to as having been entered on December 15, A. D. 1934, remain as is and unaffected by this order.
'Done and ordered this the 19th of November A. D. 1938.'

This order was, and is, as to the disposition of the motion for a deficiency decree, a final order and decree as it disposed of the only matter then pending in connection with this case.

Petition for rehearing was filed on the 3rd day of December, 1938. Petition for rehearing was denied by order of January 12, 1939.

Notice of appeal was recorded on the 11th day of July, 1939. The notice of appeal attempted to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
5 cases
  • Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 24 Septiembre 1943
    ... ... effect was to bring the original decree up for review as a ... part of it, or not, and it was not necessary or appropriate ... for the appellant to resort to review by special certiorari ... under Supreme Court Rule 34. See Theo. Hirsch Co. v ... Scott, 87 Fla. 336, 100 So. 157; Fullerton v ... Clark, 142 Fla. 200, 194 So. 481; Berns v ... Harrison, 100 Fla. 1105, 131 So. 654; Heverle v ... Rasmussen, 103 Fla. 76, 139 So. 259; Dade County v ... Snyder, 134 Fla. 756, 184 So. 489; McKell v ... Jackson, 107 Fla. 668, 145 So. 418; 3 C.J. 518; 4 ... C.J.S., Appeal and ... ...
  • Thomas v. Cilbe, Inc.
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 11 Julio 1958
    ...to review by special certiorari under Supreme Court Rule 34. See Theo. Hirsch Co. v. Scott, 87 Fla. 336, 100 So. 157; Fullerton v. Clark, 142 Fla. 200, 194 So. 481; Berns v. Harrison, 100 Fla. 1105, 131 So. 654; Heverle v. Rasmussen, 103 Fla. 76, 139 So. 259; Dade County v. Snyder, 134 Fla.......
  • Cowan v. Orange Belt Securities Co.
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 5 Marzo 1940
  • Oxford v. Polk Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n of Lakeland
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 30 Noviembre 1962
    ...settled that an appeal from an order denying a petition for rehearing does not bring up for review the final decree. Fullerton v. Clark, 1940, 142 Fla. 200, 194 So. 481; Hollywood, Inc. v. Clark, 1943, 153 Fla. 501, 15 So.2d 175; Klemenko v. Klemenko, Fla.1957, 97 So.2d 11; McNary v. Hudson......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT