N. B. BROWARD, MONTCALM BROWARD, J. M. BARRS AND A. W. BARRS, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
W. H. DAWN, W. O. WHITE, J. W. HOOD AND W. C. ROBINSON, PARTNERS UNDER THE FIRM NAME AND STYLE OF THE KNOXVILLE BUILDING AND CONTRACTING COMPANY, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR
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 quashed a writ of error because the appellants failed to file a transcript of the record, deeming the appeal taken in bad faith for delay. The court awarded damages to the appellees.
Yes, the writ of error should be quashed. The court held that failure to prosecute a writ of error by filing the required record, without excuse, warrants quashing the writ and awarding damages for delay.
“no cause being shown for the failure to prosecute the writ of error sued out, the cause will be docketed and the writ of error quashed, as being taken against good faith and merely for delay”
This quote explains the court's reasoning for quashing the writ of error.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendants in error (appellees) obtained a judgment against the plaintiffs in error (appellants). The appellants sued out a writ of error, but fai…
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.
This action was brought by the defendants in error against the plaintiffs in error. There was judgment for the plaintiffs, and the defendants take writ of error. Upon motion of the defendants in error to quash the writ of error, it appears that said writ wás sued out January 13, 1898, returnable to the first day of the present (June) term, and that the plaintiffs in error have failed to file any transcript of the record as required by statute and the rule of court, no' cause being shown for the failure to prosecute the writ of error sued out, the cause will be docketed and the writ of error quashed, as being taken against good faith and merely for delay; and the defendants in error shall recover of the plaintiffs in error the sum of twenty-five dollars as damages for their delay occasioned by such writ of error, besides the costs in this court.