WILLIAM M. TUNNO, APPELLANT,
v.
THE INTERNATIONAL RAILWAY AND STEAMSHIP COMPANY, 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 dismissed an appeal from Sumter County because the record did not show entry of a final judgment, which is a jurisdictional prerequisite for appellate review in common law actions.
The appellate court lacks jurisdiction to hear the appeal because entry of a final judgment is a jurisdictional fact that must affirmatively appear in the record. The bill of exceptions cannot substitute for or supply a missing record entry of final judgment.
“The fact of the entry of a final judgment is a jurisdictional fact, and must appear from an inspection of the record in common law actions before this court can hear and determine the errors assigned.”
Establishes that final judgment entry is a jurisdictional prerequisite for appellate review.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceWilliam M. Tunno appealed a case from Sumter County circuit court. The transcript filed with the appellate court did not contain evidence of a final j…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Jurisdictional Facts cases and more on FLexlaw
Call, Circuit Judge:
This cause is brought here from Sumter county by appeal.
A careful and thorough examination of the transcript filed here does not show the entry of any final judgment from which, under our statutes, an appeal will lie. The fact of the entry of a final judgment is a jurisdictional fact, and must appear from an inspection of the record in common law actions before this court can hear and determine the errors assigned. When the transcript in a common law action does not show an entry of a final judgment in the case the appeal will be dismissed by the appellate court of its own motion. Gates vs. Hayner, 22 Fla., 325. The bill of exceptions does show what was intended, perhaps, to be the entry of a final judgment in the case. Whether such entry is a final judgment, quaere. But if this entry is a final judgment, it is not sufficient. It must appear in the record otherwise than by the recitation in the bill of exceptions. Anderson vs. Presbyterian Church of Gainesville, 13 Fla., 592. The true office of the bill of exceptions is to present some objections in point of law to the opinion, judgment, direction, or action of the trial court on matters which do not properly appear of record, and it is not its office to supersede or take the place of any requisite record entry in a case, but to present exceptions taken during the progress of the trial, to the opinion and decision of the judge on matters which otherwise would re main in pais. Brown vs. State, 29 Fla., 548, 10 South. Rep., 736.
In this case the jurisdictional fact of the entry of a final judgment does not appear in the transcript filed here, and the appeal must therefore be dismissed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jumeau v. Camp, 48 Fla. 82 (Fla. 1904)…e must be dismissed. There is a verdict of the jury for the defendant, which was recorded and the jury was discharged, but no semblance of a judgment upon such verdict appears to have been entered. See Tunno v. International Railway & Steamship Co., 34 Fla. 300, 16 South. Rep. 180, and cases cited. Writ of error dismissed. Taylor, C. J., and Hocker and Cockrell, JJ., concur. Carter, P. J., and ShackleRord and Whitrield, JJ., concur in the opinion.…
-
Hainlin v. Budge, 56 Fla. 342 (Fla. 1908)…ee Hoodless v. Jernigan, 46 Fla. 213, text 224, 35 South. Rep. 656, text 660, and authorities there cited; Lovett v. State, 29 Fla. 356, 11 South. Rep. 172; Brown v. State, 29 Fla. 543, 10 South. Rep. 736; Tunno v. International Ry. & Steamship Co., 34 Fla. 300, 16 South. Rep. 180. In Brown v. State, supra; Glasser [*351] v, Hackett, 38 Fla. 84, 20 South. Rep. 820; Allen v. Lewis, 38 Fla. 115, 20 South. Rep. 821, will be found a full and instructive account of the origin and office of a bill of exceptions.…
-
The Merchs. Nat'l Bank of Jacksonville v. Isadore Grunthal, 38 Fla. 93 (Fla. 1896)…e’s certificate is the only evidence. Anderson vs. Presbyterian Church of Gainesville, 13 Fla. 592; Lovett vs. State, 29 Fla. 356, 11 South. Rep. 172; Brown vs. State, 29 Fla. 543, 10 South. Rep. 736; Tunno vs. International Railway & Steamship Co., 34 Fla. 300, 16 South. Rep. 180; Lamb vs. State, 73, Ga. 587. It follows, therefore, that where matters of record -are set forth only in and by a bill of exceptions certified by the Judge, it furnishes no evidence of such matters to an appellate 'court upon whi…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- O. v. Gates, 22 Fla. 325 (Fla. 1886)
- Anderson v. The Presbyterian Church of Gainesville, 13 Fla. 592 (Fla. 1869)