ALICE SELPH, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
L. C. COBB, DEFENDANT 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 dismissed a writ of error because the plaintiff in error failed to present an assignment of errors to the judge when settling the bill of exceptions, which is a violation of court rules.
Yes, the writ of error must be dismissed because the failure to present an assignment of errors to the judge violates Special Rule One for Circuit Courts, which is a mandatory procedural requirement.
“It appears from the certificate of the judge appended to the bill of exceptions that this ground of the motion is true.”
Confirms the factual basis for the motion to dismiss.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendant in error moved to dismiss the writ of error. One ground for dismissal was that no assignment of errors was presented to the judge at the…
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 Bill Of Exceptions cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
This cause came' on to be heard before the court en banc, upon motion of the defendant, in error to dismiss the writ of-error. The second ground of this motion is, in substance, that no assignment of errors was presented to the judge at the time of the presentation or settlement of the bill of exceptions.
It appears from the certificate of the judge appended to the bill of exceptions that this ground of the motion is true. This omission is in direct violation of Special Rule One for the government of Circuit Courts in the preparation of bills of exceptions, which expressly provides that such assignment of errors so to be. presented to the judge shall be the guide for making up such bill of exceptions. The judge should have refused to sign such bill in the absence of such assignment of errors, and the violation of the rule in this respect is ground for dismissal of the cause. Florida, Central and Peninsular R. R. Co. v. Peacock, 44 Fla. 176, 33 South. Rep. 247; Southerland v. Sandlin, 44 Fla. 332, 32 South. Rep. 786.
Were there any assignments of error relied upon here based upon the record proper, we might visit the violation of the rule complained of upon the bill 'of excep tions alone by striking it from the record, but as there is no error assigned here except such as can be exhibited in and by a bill of exceptions, the writ of error must be dismissed, at the cost of the plaintiff in error, and it is hereby so ordered.
Whitfield, C. J., and Taylor, Hocker, Cockrell, Shackleford and Carter, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Cornelius, 100 Fla. 292 (Fla. 1930)…ay deem .reasonable,” and the notice may be given “after the time, has expired for presenting the bill of exceptions, if the bill was in fact presented within the time allowed.” See also Glasser v. Haekett, supra. - .- In the case of Selph v. Cobb, 49 Fla. 228, 38 So. R. 259, it affirmatively appeared by the certificate of the judge that no -assignment of errors was presented when the bill of exceptions was “settled”; and it was held that' the judge should refuse to' sign a bill of exceptions when no assi…
-
Thomas v. Price, 56 Fla. 694 (Fla. 1908)…0th, 1908. Bloth appear in the transcript as required by the rule. The bill -of exceptions was settled by the judge September 16th, 1908, and does not contain a copy of the assignment of errors as required by the rule. In the case of Selph v. Cobb, 49 Fla. 228, 38 South. Rep. 259, it affirmatively appeared by the certificate of the judge that no assignment of errors was presented to the judge as required by the rule when the bill of exceptions was settled; and it was hqld that the rule had been violated a…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Cent. & Peninsular Railrod Co. v. Peacock, 44 Fla. 176 (Fla. 1902)
- Southerland v. Sandlin, 44 Fla. 332 (Fla. 1902)