Pitt v. Abrams

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtBUFORD, C.J.
Citation139 So. 152,103 Fla. 1022
PartiesPITT v. ABRAMS.
Decision Date23 December 1931

139 So. 152

103 Fla. 1022

PITT
v.
ABRAMS.

Florida Supreme Court, Division A.

December 23, 1931


Error to Circuit Court, Dade County; A. V. Long, Judge.

Ejectment suit by William T. Pitt against Marion Abrams. Judgment for the defendant, and the plaintiff brings error.

Reversed.

COUNSEL [139 So. 153]

[103 Fla. 1022] Ross Williams and Harry Neham, both of Miami, for plaintiff in error.

Carr, Carr & Carr, of Miami, for defendant in error.

OPINION

BUFORD, C.J.

In this case plaintiff in error filed ejectment suit against defendant in error to recover certain lands in Dade county. The summons and declaration were in conventional form.

The defendant pleaded not guilty.

The cause came on for trial, and plaintiff offered in evidence a deed from one John H. Treusdell to himself and then testified as follows:

'I know Mr. John H. Truesdell was in possession of this land as he and I lived together and I know he bought it. We lived where he is now on Flagler Arcade. There was no improvement on the lot. It was a vacant lot. I know Mr Truesdell was in possession of this lot because he had it because I bought from the agent. Mr. Truesdell had a deed from Miller. I saw it and had the [103 Fla. 1023] abstract examined. That is the way I know it. I saw his deed. Mr. Miller showed it to me. I saw the deed. There was no improvement on the lot.'

At the close of this evidence attorney for plaintiff announced that he closed his case. Thereupon the judge sua sponte directed the jury to return a verdict for the defendant. Thereupon, plaintiff's attorney, addressing the court, said: 'Will you permit me to go ahead?' The court replied, 'You closed your case,' and further stated: 'When a man comes into court and has a jury empaneled, and brings the defendant in and offers his case and says 'closed' that ends it. There is absolutely no case presented for the jury.' The court then directed counsel to prepare a verdict for the defendant. Thereupon, plaintiff's attorney announced, 'Plaintiff will take a nonsuit.' The court declined to allow plaintiff to take a nonsuit. The court then examined the verdict which was prepared and ordered a member of the jury to sign it as foreman. The verdict in favor of defendant was signed, read, and filed.

There are two points raised by the assignments of error. The first is: Was it reversible error for the court to decline to allow plaintiff to proceed further with the presentation of...

To continue reading

Request your trial
9 practice notes
  • Thoman v. Ashley, No. 4548
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 18, 1964
    ...by statute prior to the 1954 R.C.P., has been held not subject to judicial discretion. Pitt v. Abrams, 1941, 103 Fla.App., 1022, 1024, 139 So. 152. A sole exception has been recognized in circumstances where the plaintiff clearly could not recover in any event, as where it affirmatively app......
  • Hartquist v. Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 18, 1939
    ...525; Haile v. Mason Hotel & Inv. Co., 71 Fla. 469, 71 So. 540; West Coast Fruit Co. v. Hackney, 98 Fla. 382, 123 So. 758; Pitt v. Abrams, 103 Fla. 1022, 139 So. 152. [139 Fla. 345] A nonsuit is of two kinds--voluntary and involuntary. It becomes involuntary when it is prompted by an adverse......
  • Cook v. Lichtblau, No. 4515
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 28, 1965
    ...of plaintiff's cause of action.' Hartquist v. Tamiami Trail Tours, 139 Fla. 328, 190 So.2d 533, 540. See also Pitt v. Abrams, 103 Fla. 1022, 139 So. 152, and Haile v. Mason Hotel & Investment Co., 71 Fla. 469, 71 So. 540. It should be noted that the right to appeal from such an 'involuntary......
  • J. Schnarr & Co. v. Virginia-carolina Chemical Corp.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • December 6, 1934
    ...think otherwise, and are of the opinion that the question has been determined contrary to these views by the case of Pitt v. Abrams, 103 Fla. 1022, 139 So. 152. In that case, however, no distinction is made between a voluntary and an involuntary nonsuit, nor is anything said as to the effec......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
9 cases
  • Thoman v. Ashley, No. 4548
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • December 18, 1964
    ...by statute prior to the 1954 R.C.P., has been held not subject to judicial discretion. Pitt v. Abrams, 1941, 103 Fla.App., 1022, 1024, 139 So. 152. A sole exception has been recognized in circumstances where the plaintiff clearly could not recover in any event, as where it affirmatively app......
  • Hartquist v. Tamiami Trail Tours, Inc.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • July 18, 1939
    ...525; Haile v. Mason Hotel & Inv. Co., 71 Fla. 469, 71 So. 540; West Coast Fruit Co. v. Hackney, 98 Fla. 382, 123 So. 758; Pitt v. Abrams, 103 Fla. 1022, 139 So. 152. [139 Fla. 345] A nonsuit is of two kinds--voluntary and involuntary. It becomes involuntary when it is prompted by an adverse......
  • Cook v. Lichtblau, No. 4515
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • May 28, 1965
    ...of plaintiff's cause of action.' Hartquist v. Tamiami Trail Tours, 139 Fla. 328, 190 So.2d 533, 540. See also Pitt v. Abrams, 103 Fla. 1022, 139 So. 152, and Haile v. Mason Hotel & Investment Co., 71 Fla. 469, 71 So. 540. It should be noted that the right to appeal from such an 'involuntary......
  • J. Schnarr & Co. v. Virginia-carolina Chemical Corp.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • December 6, 1934
    ...think otherwise, and are of the opinion that the question has been determined contrary to these views by the case of Pitt v. Abrams, 103 Fla. 1022, 139 So. 152. In that case, however, no distinction is made between a voluntary and an involuntary nonsuit, nor is anything said as to the effec......
  • 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