THE UNION BANK OF FLORIDA, FOR THE USE OF CHARLES MORRISON,
v.
BURWELL MCBRIDE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida Supreme Court dismissed a Writ of Error brought by the Union Bank of Florida on behalf of Charles Morrison because the plaintiff failed to comply with statutory requirements to pay all accrued costs and post a bond before appealing. The decision upholds a mandatory procedural requirement designed to ensure appellants bear the financial burden of their appeals.
A plaintiff seeking a Writ of Error must first pay all costs that have accrued in the lower court and enter into a bond with sufficient security to cover any costs that may accrue during the appeal, before the court will grant the writ. These are mandatory procedural prerequisites, not discretionary requirements.
“no appeal, or Writ of Error, shall hereafter be granted to tho original plaintiff in any suit, unless said plaintiff first pay all costs which may have accrued, in and about said suit, up to tho time when said appeal or Writ of Error is prayed; and, also, ontor into bond, with one or more securities, in a sum sufficient to cover all costs which may accrue, in the prosecution of said appeal, or Writ of Error, conditioned to pay the same, if tho judgment, sentence, or decree of the court shall be affirmed.”
The statutory requirement that motivated the court's decision to dismiss the appeal for non-compliance
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCharles Morrison, a non-resident, brought suit against Burwell McBride in the Circuit Court for Jefferson County before Chief Justice Thomas Douglas. …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Lancaster, Justice:
This cause comes up by Writ of Error, from the Circuit Court for Jefferson County, Chief Justice Thomas Douglas having sat at the trial. » The statute of February 12, 1836, Thompson’s Digest, 447, section 5, referred to by defendant’s attorney, provides that “ no “ appeal, or Writ of Error, shall hereafter be granted to tho original “ plaintiff in any suit, unless said plaintiff first pay all costs which “ may have accrued, in and about said suit, up to tho time when “ said appeal or Writ of Error is prayed; and, also, ontor into bond, “ with one or more securities, in a sum sufficient to cover all costs “ which may accrue, in the prosecution of said appeal, or Writ of “ Error, conditioned to pay the same, if tho judgment, sentence, or “ decree of the court shall be affirmed.”
This act of the Legislature (believed by the Court to be in full force) is regarded by them as applicable to, and conclusive on this motion. The payment of all costs below, and entering into bond, as in the act proscribed, seem to be steps precedent to granting a Writ of Error, imperatively required by the statute. Any other construction would, they think, be repugnant to the act, an evasion of it, and, in some measure, render it inoperative.
The reason assigned for not having given tho required bond does not, in tho opinion of the Court, strengthen the plaintiffs position. He is admitted to be a non-resident, and, therefore, not within the reach of process from the Courts of this State. It is not sufficiently apparent that he paid all costs which accrued in and about his suit in the Circuit Court, the best evidence of which would be the certificate of the Clerk of that Court, and in the opinion of this Court, therefore, the most proper evidence. He failed in his suit below, yet, without payment of past costs, or security for those which may hero accrue, he seeks further to pursue this defendant. His being a non-resident adds legal force to tho liability he was under to pay all costs below, as well as give bond for those which might accrue here, before suing out his writ.
The Court are unanimously of opinion the motion must be allowed, and do order this cause to be dismissed, and that tho defendant, Burwell McBride, have judgment for his costs.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The City OF Miami v. Murphy, 137 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 1962)…istory. The books contain almost enumerable cases in which it has been applied. It has been repeatedly upheld against direct assaults upon its validity. Its original legislative predecessor was initially approved in Union Bank of Florida v. McBride, 2 Fla. 7. Detailed references which reveal both the history and sources of applicable decisions was thoroughly covered by us in O’Connell v. Mason, Fla.1957, 93 So. 2d 71. It is clear that the purpose of the statute is to discourage the filing of frivolous a…
-
Callison v. Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co., 82 Fla. 516 (Fla. 1921)…such costs as may have been incurred by plaintiff only. The express language of the statute negatives such idea and forbids the adoption of the construction contended for. This statute has been the law for many years. Union Bank, etc., v. McBride, 2 Fla. 7; Gordon and Wife v. Camp, 2 Fla. 23. Formerly a plaintiff in error who was the. original plaintiff was not only required to first pay all costs which may have accrued in and about the said suit up to the time writ of error was prayed before he was e…
-
Hall v. Penny, 13 Fla. 593 (Fla. 1869)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence