Milligan v. Wilson

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtTHORNAL; TERRELL
PartiesHerman D. MILLIGAN, Appellant, v. Irene Wells WILSON, Appellee.
Decision Date20 June 1958

Page 35

104 So.2d 35
Herman D. MILLIGAN, Appellant,
v.
Irene Wells WILSON, Appellee.
Supreme Court of Florida.
June 20, 1958.

Ernest A. Townsend and Oxford & Oxford, Lakeland, for appellant.

Tittsworth & Tittsworth, Tampa, for appellee.

THORNAL, Justice.

Appellant Milligan, who was plaintiff below, seeks reversal of an order of the trial judge dismissing his complaint in an action based on a foreign judgment.

We must dispose of the matter on jurisdictional grounds without reaching the merits.

Milligan recovered a judgment against appellee Irene Wells Wilson and another in the State of Virginia. In the instant case he proceeded in the Circuit Court of Hillsborough County, Florida by a complaint attaching authenticated copies of the Virginia judgment and proceedings. Appellee Wilson answered and also moved to dismiss the complaint contending that the Virginia record reflected jurisdictional defects in the Virginia judgment. On July 10, 1957 the trial judge sustained the motion and entered an order dismissing the complaint. By direct appeal to this court, appellant seeks reversal of that order.

It is unnecessary to delineate the contentions of the parties on the merits of the

Page 36

appeal for the reason that we are immediately challenged by a jurisdictional problem which precludes our consideration thereof.

It should be noted that the order under assault was entered subsequent to July 1, 1957, when Amended Article V of the Florida Constitution became effective. By that amendment to our organic law the appellate jurisdiction of this court was circumscribed by certain carefully defined limitations. On the other hand, within the orbit of the provisions of Amended Article V, supra, the only imaginable jurisdictional basis upon which appellant seeks to rely is that portion of Article V, Section 4(b), Florida Constitution, F.S.A., which reads in part as follows:

'Appeals from trial courts may be taken directly to the supreme court, as a matter of right, only from judgments * * * construing a controlling provision of the Florida or federal constitution * * *.'

'Construing' is the key word in the quoted language of the Constitution. Our examination of the order of dismissal entered by the trial judge here fails to reveal any judicial construction or interpretation of the Federal Constitution. No provision of the Florida Constitution was even remotely involved. Appellant does contend that the judge failed to extend full faith and credit to...

To continue reading

Request your trial
7 practice notes
  • Schermerhorn v. Local 1625 of Retail Clerks Intern. Ass'n, AFL-CIO, AFL-CIO
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • April 25, 1962
    ...order quoted above clearly and unquestionably construes Section 12, Declaration of Rights. Unlike in Milligan v. Wilson, Fla., 104 So.2d 35, and Carmazi v. Board of County Commissioners, Fla., 104 So.2d 727, the issues in the instant case required the trial court to rule directly on a const......
  • Dresner v. City of Tallahassee, No. 33109
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • May 22, 1964
    ...constitution is directly appealable to the Florida Supreme Court. Art. V, Sec. 4(2), Florida Constitution; Milligan v. Wilson (Fla.), 104 So.2d 35. Assuming, for purposes of the instant case, that the Circuit Court would be classified generically as a 'trial court' exercising an incidental ......
  • Evans v. Carroll
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 16, 1958
    ...is not foisted upon us.' State ex rel. Audrain County v. City of mexico, 355 Mo. 612, 197 S.W.2d 301. See, also, Milligan v. Wilson, Fla., 104 So.2d 35. An examination of the record in the Page 378 instant case for this purpose fully sustains the apparent conclusion of the trial court that ......
  • State v. Lyons, No. 73--728
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • April 3, 1974
    ...City of Tampa, Fla.1958, 106 So.2d 407; Carmazi v. Board of County Commissioners, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 727; Milligan v. Wilson, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 35; Rojas v. State, Fla.1973, 288 So.2d 234, 236; Ogle v. Pepin, Fla.1973, 273 So.2d 2 Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(f) provides that: '......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
7 cases
  • Schermerhorn v. Local 1625 of Retail Clerks Intern. Ass'n, AFL-CIO, AFL-CIO
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • April 25, 1962
    ...order quoted above clearly and unquestionably construes Section 12, Declaration of Rights. Unlike in Milligan v. Wilson, Fla., 104 So.2d 35, and Carmazi v. Board of County Commissioners, Fla., 104 So.2d 727, the issues in the instant case required the trial court to rule directly on a const......
  • Dresner v. City of Tallahassee, No. 33109
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • May 22, 1964
    ...constitution is directly appealable to the Florida Supreme Court. Art. V, Sec. 4(2), Florida Constitution; Milligan v. Wilson (Fla.), 104 So.2d 35. Assuming, for purposes of the instant case, that the Circuit Court would be classified generically as a 'trial court' exercising an incidental ......
  • Evans v. Carroll
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 16, 1958
    ...is not foisted upon us.' State ex rel. Audrain County v. City of mexico, 355 Mo. 612, 197 S.W.2d 301. See, also, Milligan v. Wilson, Fla., 104 So.2d 35. An examination of the record in the Page 378 instant case for this purpose fully sustains the apparent conclusion of the trial court that ......
  • State v. Lyons, No. 73--728
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • April 3, 1974
    ...City of Tampa, Fla.1958, 106 So.2d 407; Carmazi v. Board of County Commissioners, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 727; Milligan v. Wilson, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 35; Rojas v. State, Fla.1973, 288 So.2d 234, 236; Ogle v. Pepin, Fla.1973, 273 So.2d 2 Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 41(f) provides that: '......
  • 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