Porter v. Parslow
| Decision Date | 02 February 1897 |
| Citation | 21 So. 574,39 Fla. 50 |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
| Parties | PORTER v. PARSLOW et al. |
Error to circuit court, Hillsborough county; G. A. Hanson, Judge.
Action by Josephine Parslow and Alfred H. Parslow, her husband against the firm of F. P. Seclor & Co., of which Joseph Y Porter is surviving partner. Judgment for plaintiffs, and defendant Porter, as surviving partner, brings error. Reversed.
Syllabus by the Court
1. A default for want of a plea cannot be entered where the defendant has filed pleas to which a demurrer has been sustained, with no leave to plead over.
2. Where the brief for plaintiff in error contains simply a bare statement that a ruling of the lower court is erroneous, no reasons being given, no principles of law stated, and no authorities cited, an assignment of error based upon such ruling will be treated as abandoned for failure to argue same, unless the error complained of is so glaring or patent that no argument is needed to demonstrate it.
W. A. Carter, for plaintiff in error.
The defendants in error brought an action of assumpsit against the firm of F. P. Seclor & Co., of which plaintiff in error is surviving partner, in the circuit court of Hillsborough county, on July 1, 1889. No summons was issued to the defendants, but on September 2, 1889, Joseph Y Porter, one of the defendants, filed pleas to the declaration in his own behalf only. Plaintiffs filed a demurrer to these pleas, which was heard October 3, 1889, and an order made thereon in the following words: On April 7, 1890, plaintiffs filed a praecipe with the clerk, instructing him to enter a default against defendants for want of a plea or demurrer; and on July 6, 1891, the clerk entered judgment by default in accordance with the praecipe. On August 31, 1891, the clerk upon affidavit of one of the plaintiffs purporting to prove the cause of action sued upon, entered final judgment against the defendants, and the writ of error was sued out from this judgment by the plaintiff in error, as surviving partner, his co-defendant having died.
The only assignments of error argued by plaintiff in error are that the clerk had no power to enter the default or final judgment, under the state of the pleadings at the time of such entry. This court has held more than once that a default cannot be entered for want of a plea where the defendant has filed pleas to...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hoodless v. Jernigan
...v. State, 46 Fla. ----, 35 So. 185. It cannot be said that this error is so glaring as not to require argument to demonstrate it. Porter v. Parslow, supra. sixth and last error assigned is that the court erred in denying defendant's motion for a new trial. Turning to the ordinary bill of ex......
-
Mathis v. State
... ... 1009, and Williams v. State, 34 ... So. 279 (each decided at the present term); Thomas v ... State, 36 Fla. 109, 18 So. 331; Porter v ... Parslow, 39 Fla. 50, 21 So. 574 ... The ... twenty-first error assigned is as follows: 'The court ... below erred in refusing ... ...
-
White v. Crandall
...Express Co. v. Van Meter, 17 Fla. 783, 35 Am. Rep. 107; Bloodworth v. A. H. & F. H. Lippincott, 78 Fla. 261, 82 So. 827; Porter v. Parslow, 39 Fla. 50, 21 So. 574; Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. Nims, 61 Fla. 420, 54 779; Jordan v. Sayre, 24 Fla. 1, 3 So. 329; McCook v. Caruthers, 87 Fla. 238, 99......
-
Williams v. State
... ... upon a somewhat similar one in the case of Thomas v ... State, 36 Fla. 109, 18 So. 331, approved in Porter ... v. Parslow, 39 Fla. 50, 21 So. 574 ... The ... thirty-fourth assignment of error: This assignment is based ... on the refusal of ... ...