Pawley v. Pawley
| Decision Date | 26 July 1950 |
| Parties | PAWLEY v. PAWLEY. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Redfearn & Ferrell and Ward & Ward, all of Miami, for appellant.
Loftin, Anderson, Scott, McCarthy & Preston, Miami, for appellee.
We are confronted with a petition of appellant, filed June 29, 1950, to recall the mandate in this cause and for leave to file extraordinary petition for rehearing, copy of said extraordinary petition being attached to said petition. There is also attached to the petition copy of a petition for leave to file an extraordinary petition for rehearing filed by Redfearn and Ferrell, attorneys for appellant, of Miami, Florida, which was denied because the term of court had expired when it was filed.
It appears that the opinion of this court was filed April 6, 1950, finally disposing of the cause, that a petition for rehearing was duly filed and was denied June 9, 1950, on which date the mandate went down, finally disposing of the cause. The January term of this court closed June 12, 1950, at which time it was ordered (1) 'That the Clerk do issue the Mandate in any case decided or disposed of at the present term in which Mandate has not been heretofore issued, except as otherwise ordered, at the expiration of fifteen days from the date of the entry of the judgment herein, provided that a petition for rehearing has not been filed within that time.' (2) That 'all cases, motions and proceedings now pending be continued until the next regular term of the court.'
There being no motion or other basis for any action pending in this cause on the date the January Term closed June 12th, the cause was not brought over to the June Term by virtue of the order (2) recited, but, under the order (1) recited above, the mandate went down, the case was closed, and the court lost jurisdiction of the cause.
It is accordingly ordered, adjudged and decreed that the cause having been closed and the court having lost jurisdiction thereof, the petition of appellant for recall of the mandate and for leave to file an extraordinary petition for rehearing, be and the same is hereby denied.
It is further ordered, adjudged and decreed that the petition for rehearing first filed, the extraordinary petition for rehearing and recall of the mandate, including the present petition to recall the mandate and permit the filing of this extraordinary petition for rehearing, each and all, be made a part...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Jaffe v. Snow
...90 L.Ed. 425 (1945).6 See Beckwith v. Bailey, 119 Fla. 316, 161 So. 576 (1935).7 See Pawley v. Pawley, 46 So.2d 464 (Fla.), rev. denied, 47 So.2d 546, cert. denied, 340 U.S. 866, 71 S.Ct. 90, 95 L.Ed. 632 (1950).8 See Willson v. Willson, 55 So.2d 905 (Fla.1951); Co., Ltd. v. Shaheen, 544 F.......
-
Mouzon v. Mouzon
...News, 156 U.S. 518, 15 S.Ct. 559, 39 L.Ed. 517 (1895).7 See Pawley v. Pawley, 46 So.2d 464 (Fla.1950), 28 A.L.R.2d 1358, reh. den., 47 So.2d 546 (Fla.1950), cert. den., 340 U.S. 866, 71 S.Ct. 90, 95 L.Ed. 632 (1950); Hunter v. Hunter, 359 So.2d 500 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978), rev. den., 365 So.2d ......
-
Orbe v. Orbe
...the divisible divorce concept. 2 See Davis v. Dieujuste, 496 So.2d 806 (Fla.1986); Pawley v. Pawley, 46 So.2d 464 (Fla.), pet. denied, 47 So.2d 546 (Fla.); cert. denied, 340 U.S. 866, 71 S.Ct. 90, 95 L.Ed. 632 (1950). In such case the court can grant the dissolution of marriage without addr......
-
Woods v. Woods, 84-260
...the spouse's cause of action for marital property or alimony. Pawley v. Pawley, 46 So.2d 464, (Fla.1950), 28 A.L.R.2d 1358, reh'g. den. 47 So.2d 546, cert. den. 340 U.S. 866, 71 S.Ct. 90, 95 L.Ed. Mary voluntarily left the state of matrimonial domicile, Arkansas, and at the time of the divo......