W. J. WESTON ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
S. D. MOODY ET AL., APPELLEES
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 addressed a motion to dismiss an appeal due to a late and overly general petition. The court allowed the appeal to proceed on condition that the appellants file an amended petition within ten days, citing liberal practice in such cases.
The court held that while the objection to the generality of the petition was well-taken, it did not justify dismissal. The court granted the appellants' motion to file the petition on the condition that they file an amended petition within ten days, specifying the alleged errors.
“Appellees moved to dismiss appeal taken to this-term, on account of failure of appellants to file a petition of appeal within the time prescribed by Rule 8.”
Describes the initial procedural action leading to the current court's consideration.
Previewing 1 of 4 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellees moved to dismiss an appeal because the appellants failed to file their petition of appeal within the time prescribed by Rule 8. The appellan…
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.
Raney, C. J.:
Appellees moved to dismiss appeal taken to this-term, on account of failure of appellants to file a petition of appeal within the time prescribed by Rule 8. Appellants have presented a petition of appeal and moved to be permitted to file the same. The appellees object to the petition as being too' general, in stating that the court below “admitted improper evidence,” and “rejected proper evidence,” without pointing out the particular evidence admitted or rejected. This objection to sufficiency of these statements of the errors complained of, is well taken, yet we do not think it-justifies a dismissal of the appeal. Pittman vs. Myrick 16 Fla., 401. We will, under the liberal practice obtaining in such cases, permit the appeal to stand upon the following terms : The costs of both motions-will be taxed against appellants, and the appellants-must within ten days file an amended petition of appeal designating such rulings, orders and decrees as- they claim to be erroneous. Should they fail to fil e su ch amended petition the court will of its own motion dismiss the appeal. The motion of appellees will be denied, and that of the appellants granted on the terms indicated as to each.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Maloy v. State, 39 Fla. 432 (Fla. 1897)…ssignments of error predicated upon the admission or rejection of evidence must point out and specify what evidence <was improperly admitted or excluded, and if they fail [*434] to do so, the appellate court will not consider them. Weston vs. Moody, 29 Fla. 169, 10 South. Rep. 612; Jacksonville, Tampa and Key West Ry. Co. vs. Griffin, 33 Fla. 602, 15 South. Rep. 336; H. B. Claflin Co. vs. Rodenburg, 101 Ala. 213, 13 South. Rep. 272. One of the grounds of the motion for new trial was the exclusion of certai…
Authorities Cited
- Pittman's Administrator v. Myrick, 16 Fla. 401 (Fla. 1878)