Van Fleet v. Lindgren

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court of Florida
Writing for the CourtTHORNAL; TERRELL
Citation107 So.2d 381
Decision Date10 December 1958
PartiesWaller VAN FLEET, Petitioner, v. A. W. LINDGREN and Anna Belle Lindgren, his wife, Respondents.

Page 381

107 So.2d 381
Waller VAN FLEET, Petitioner,
v.
A. W. LINDGREN and Anna Belle Lindgren, his wife, Respondents.
Supreme Court of Florida.
Dec. 10, 1958.

Talbot W. Trammell, Miami, for petitioner.

Thomas H. Anderson and Anderson & Nadeau, Miami, for respondents.

THORNAL, Justice.

By petition for certiorari petitioner Van Fleet requests us to review a decision of the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, on the ground that that decision conflicts with a prior decision of this court on the same point of law.

We are called upon to determine whether the decision of the District Court of Appeal in Lindgren v. Van Fleet, Fla.App.1958, 101 So.2d 155, conflicts with the prior decision of this court in Foxworth v. Maddox, 103 Fla. 32, 137 So. 161.

Van Fleet filed in the Circuit Court a complaint praying for the specific enforcement of an alleged contract for the conveyance of land. He asked that Lindgren and wife be required to convey the land to him. He also asked that the conveyance be executed by one Spechler and wife, whom he alleged had acquired title from the Lindgrens with notice of the Van Fleet contract. There was an alternative prayer for damages in the event of denial of specific performance. The Chancellor granted the requested relief for specific performance and entered a decree accordingly. By the decree he directed Lindgren and wife as well as the Spechlers to execute conveyances to Van Fleet. Numerous defenses were pleaded in the specific performance suit. We discuss only one of them here because the others are not before us for consideration. Lindgren and wife appealed to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District, which rendered its decision appearing in 101 So.2d 155.

An examination of the cited decision of the Court of Appeal will reveal that that court decided that the decree of the Chancellor was erroneous as to Mrs. Lindgren for the reason that she had not joined in the contract of sale in order to waive her

Page 382

dower rights as required by Section 708.07, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. With reference to Mr. Lindgren, the original seller, the Court of Appeal decided that the decree of the Chancellor was erroneous because in the view of the appellate court Van Fleet, the purchaser, had orginally proceeded on the theory that he was entitled to a conveyance by both husband and wife as a result of the wife's participation in the negotiation and her acquiescence therein resulting in an estoppel that would preclude her from denying her consent to the original transaction. From this premise the Court of Appeal then apparently reasoned that even if the circumstances revealed by the record would otherwise justify an order directing the husband alone to execute a deed, he should not be required to do so in this instance because Van Fleet, the purchaser, had insisted upon complete performance by both parties in the lower...

To continue reading

Request your trial
8 practice notes
  • Nielsen v. City of Sarasota, No. 30
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • February 3, 1960
    ...We limit ourselves entirely to a review of the point of law passed upon in the decision under consideration. Van Fleet v. Lindgren, Fla., 107 So.2d 381. The petitioners contend that there was adequate circumstantial evidence from which a jury could properly infer a causal relationship betwe......
  • Florida Power & Light Co. v. Ahearn
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • February 17, 1960
    ...cause to the district court of appeal for further consideration. King v. King, Fla.1959, 111 So.2d 33; Van Fleet v. Lindgren, Fla.1958, 107 So.2d 381. Accordingly, the decision of the district court of appeal is hereby quashed and the cause remanded for consideration of the remaining two po......
  • Lindgren v. Van Fleet, Nos. 57-75
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 11, 1959
    ...against Mrs. Lindgren, who, before the conveyance to the Spechlers, held an inchoate dower interest in the land. See 101 So.2d 155 and 107 So.2d 381. By the conveyance to the Spechlers she relinquished to them the dower interest which she had not been obligated to relinquish to the Van At n......
  • Thompson v. City of Miami, No. 33330
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • September 9, 1964
    ...appropriate decision on the other assignments of error presented to, but not passed upon, by that court. Cf. Van Fleet v. Lindgren, Fla., 107 So.2d 381. It is so DREW, C. J., THOMAS and HOBSON (Retired), JJ., and MASON, Circuit Judge, concur. ...
  • Request a trial to view additional results
8 cases
  • Nielsen v. City of Sarasota, No. 30
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • February 3, 1960
    ...We limit ourselves entirely to a review of the point of law passed upon in the decision under consideration. Van Fleet v. Lindgren, Fla., 107 So.2d 381. The petitioners contend that there was adequate circumstantial evidence from which a jury could properly infer a causal relationship betwe......
  • Florida Power & Light Co. v. Ahearn
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • February 17, 1960
    ...cause to the district court of appeal for further consideration. King v. King, Fla.1959, 111 So.2d 33; Van Fleet v. Lindgren, Fla.1958, 107 So.2d 381. Accordingly, the decision of the district court of appeal is hereby quashed and the cause remanded for consideration of the remaining two po......
  • Lindgren v. Van Fleet, Nos. 57-75
    • United States
    • Court of Appeal of Florida (US)
    • June 11, 1959
    ...against Mrs. Lindgren, who, before the conveyance to the Spechlers, held an inchoate dower interest in the land. See 101 So.2d 155 and 107 So.2d 381. By the conveyance to the Spechlers she relinquished to them the dower interest which she had not been obligated to relinquish to the Van At n......
  • Thompson v. City of Miami, No. 33330
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court of Florida
    • September 9, 1964
    ...appropriate decision on the other assignments of error presented to, but not passed upon, by that court. Cf. Van Fleet v. Lindgren, Fla., 107 So.2d 381. It is so DREW, C. J., THOMAS and HOBSON (Retired), JJ., and MASON, Circuit Judge, concur. ...
  • 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