State Ex Rel. Briggs v. Barns
Decision Date | 03 December 1935 |
Citation | 164 So. 539,121 Fla. 857 |
Parties | STATE ex rel. BRIGGS v. BARNS, Judge, et al. |
Court | Florida Supreme Court |
En Banc.
Proceedings by the State, on the relation of Charles L. Briggs, for writ of prohibition, opposed by the Honorable Paul D. Barns, as Judge of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit for Dade County, and another. On demurrer to suggestion for writ, on answer, and on motion to strike certain parts of the answer.
Returns held sufficient, and rule nisi discharged.
Shutts & Bowen, L. S. Julian, and H. N. Boureau, all of Miami, for relator.
Hudson & Cason, of Miami, for respondents.
Evans Mershon & Sawyer and W. O. Mehrtens, all of Miami, amici curiae.
This case is before us on demurrer to suggestion for writ of prohibition and answer to the suggestion for writ of prohibition filed after rule nisi was issued herein; also motion to strike certain parts of the answer or return.
To place the issues now before the court before the bench and bar so that the judgment entered herein may be of service to both, it is necessary to quote largely from the pleadings.
The suggestion for writ of prohibition alleges:
'5. On May 6, 1935, the Return Day of said purported alias writ of summons, said Chas. L. Briggs, filed in said cause his special appearance expressly for the sole and only purpose of contesting the jurisdiction of said Circuit Court over said Chas. L. Briggs; and on May 21, 1935, not less than ten (10) days before the next succeeding Rule Day, said Chas. L. Briggs appearing specially for the sole purpose thereof, filed in said cause his motion to quash said purported alias writ of summons issued in said cause and directed to him, and to set aside and quash said Sheriff's return thereon, containing a statement of the grounds of said special appearance and motion, and bearing an acknowledgment of receipt of a copy of said motion on said date by the attorneys for said Second National Bank of Boston.
'6. On May 6, 1935, said Second National Bank of Boston filed in said cause its declaration and a copy of its alleged cause of action, setting forth that W. C. Briggs, Inc., a Florida corporation, on the 7th day of December, 1929, by its promissory note, overdue, promised to pay to said Second National Bank of Boston $100,000.00 three months after date; that said Chas. L. Briggs endorsed same before its execution and delivery, and that although said note was duly presented for payment and was dishonored, of which the said Chas. L. Briggs had due notice, he did not pay the same.
'7. On July 1, 1935, said motion to quash the purported service of said original writ of summons and the Sheriff's return thereon, and said motion to quash said purported alias writ of summons and said Sheriff's return thereon, came on to be heard before the Honorable Paul D. Barns, as Judge of said Court, and after argument by counsel for the respective parties, the said Honorable Paul D. Barns as Judge of said Court on the same day made and rendered an order in said cause denying said motion to quash said purported alias writ of summons and to set aside and quash the Sheriff's return thereon.
And it further alleged that the circuit court of the Eleventh judicial circuit of Florida, in and for Dade county, and the Honorable Paul D. Barns, as judge, were without jurisdiction because of the facts alleged, hereinbefore set forth, but that the said Honorable Paul D. Barns, as judge of said circuit court, proposed to proceed to hear and determine the cause and to render such order and judgment as he might deem appropriate.
It further alleged as follows:
The prayer was for writ of prohibition to restrain the circuit court from proceeding further in the cause.
The exhibits attached to the suggestion support the allegation as to the issuance of summons ad res., alias summons ad res. and the returns.
Rule nisi was issued. It is not necessary to quote the demurrer.
The return of Judge Barns contains the following:
'3. This respondent says that the service of the original summons was defective and irregular to the extent of not being...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Klosenski v. Flaherty
...of the writ, and not the sheriff's return, which gives the court jurisdiction over the defendant.' See also State ex rel. Briggs v. Barns, 1935, 121 Fla. 857, 164 So. 539, 542. Many other decisions of this court show clearly that the officer's return is no part of the service--either to add......
-
Sunrise Beach, Inc. v. Phillips, s. 6220
...one in which there is some suspicion of invalidity, does not bar issuance of a second summons by the clerk. See State ex rel. Briggs v. Barnes, 1935, 121 Fla. 857, 164 So. 539. Compare Punta Gorda Ready Mixed Concrete, Inc., supra, with the procedure formerly employed under Fla.Stat., Sec. ......
-
Rumpf v. Freedman, 59-280
...of the writ, and not the sheriff's return, which gives the court jurisdiction over the defendant.' See also State ex rel. Briggs v. Barns, 1935, 121 Fla. 857, 164 So. 539, 542. 'Many other decisions of this court show clearly that the officer's return is no part of the service--either to ad......
- State Ex Rel. Williams v. Lee