WILLIAM T. COTTER, APPELLANT,
v.
CHARLES HOLMES, APPELLEE
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 due to procedural defects, including an improperly made return date and an incorrect entry in the court minutes.
The appeal was not properly entered or made returnable, and therefore, it is dismissed.
“the appeal attempted to be entered therein on the thirteenth of August, 1897, is made returnable “to the Su [*163] preme Court of Florida, A. D. 1898,” without naming aav day or term of the court in said year, 1898, when it is returnable”
describes the defect in the appeal's return date
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAn appeal was attempted to be entered on August 13, 1897, made returnable to the Supreme Court of Florida, A.D. 1898, without specifying a day or term…
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.
Per Curiam.
This cause being reached in its regular order on the docket for final adjudication was referred by the court to its commissioners for investigation, who-report the same for dismissal. The court, after due consideration, finds that the appeal attempted to be entered therein on the thirteenth of August, 1897, is made returnable “to the Su preme Court of Florida, A. D. 1898,” without naming aav day or term of the court in said year, 1898, when it is returnable, and the said entry of appeal was entered in the minutes of the Cireuip Court instead of in the Chancery Order Book as required by law, and that the appellee has in no manner appeared in this court, it is, therefore, ordered and adjudged that said appeal be, and the same is hereby dismissed at the cost of the appellant.