M. B. JONES, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
THE ESCAMBIA LAND AND MANUFACTURING COMPANY, 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.
Petitioners sought to establish a lost deed allegedly executed in 1833 conveying land to their ancestor Cleopatra Jones. The circuit court dismissed the petition for failure to establish the lost deed, and petitioners appealed. The Florida Supreme Court dismissed the appeal, holding that statutory proceedings to reestablish lost deeds must be reviewed by writ of error, not appeal.
The court held that appeal is not the proper method of review for such statutory proceedings. Instead, the proper remedy is a writ of error, because the statutes governing reestablishment of lost deeds do not expressly provide that review shall be by appeal.
“This court has recently held in effect that proceedings to reestablish lost proceedings or papers in a pending suit, will be either common law or chancery according to the character of the pending suit.”
Establishes the framework for classifying reestablishment proceedings based on underlying suit character
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceM. B. Jones and others filed a petition in Santa Rosa County circuit court to establish a lost deed allegedly executed by James Brewster in 1833 conve…
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 Statutory Remedies cases and more on FLexlaw
Hocker, J.
—M. B. Jones, Josiah Jones, Alpeous Jones, Margaret West, Eliza Polk, W. B. Polk, Jefferson Jones, B. T. Jones, Mattie Botts and J. W. Botts, filed a petition in the circuit court of Santa Rosa county for the establishment of a lost deed alleged to have been executed in 1833 by one James Brewster, conveying certain lands to one Cleopatra Jones under and through whom] the petitioners claim. It is alleged in 'the petition that the petitioners and the Escambia Land and Manufacturing Company, Mf. Lindsey, W. B. Aycock, B. F. ‘ Williamson and J. Earle Williamson, partners as Aycock & Williamson, are the persons and only persons known to petitioners interested for or against the re-establishment of said paper. Notice to show cause was given by publication. 'M. Lindsey answlered the petition, denying upon (information and belief the execution of the alleged deed, and that it had been lost or destroyed. Testimony was taken by agreement, and upon a hearing the circuit judge made an order in which he states that the testimony fails to establish the alleged lost deed and dismissed the petition at the cost of the petitioners. An appeal was taken from this order, which was entered in the chancery order book.
It -is contended by the appellees that an appeal is not the proper method of bringing the case to this court for review.
This proceeding is evidently based on sections 1997, 1998 and 1999, of the General Statutes of 1906. This court has recently held in effect that proceedings to reestablish lost proceedings or papers in a pending -suit, will be either common law or chancery according to the character of the pending suit. Florida Cent. R. Co. v. Bostwick, 53 Fla. 124, 44 South. Rep. 31; Florida Central & Western R. R. Co. v. Bostwick, decided at the present termi. But it is. established in other cases where statutory remedies are given, and it is not expressly provided that the method of reviewing orders made therein shall be by appeal—then the only manner of obtaining a review by this court is by writ of error. Clinton v. Colclough, 54 Fla. 520, 44 South. Rep. 878; Heebner v. Orange City, 44 Fla. 159, 32 South. Rep. 879.
In the case of Campbell v. Skinner Mfg. Co., 53 Fla. 632, 43 South. Rep. 874, the remedy by writ of error in such a case is recognized. The sections of the General Statutes referred to do not provide for a review of the orders of the circuit court by appeal, and therefore the appeal in the instant case must be dismissed. Montgomery v. Thomas, 40 Fla. 450, 25 South. Rep. 62; Trabue v. Williams, 46 Fla. 228, 35 South. Rep. 872.
Taylor and Parichill, JJ., concur;
Shackleford, C. J., Cockrell and Whitfield, JJ., concur in the opinion.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Davidson v. Puss Powers, 114 Fla. 109 (Fla. 1934)…re-establish lost papers and records is given, and it is not expressly provided that the method of reviewing orders made therein shall be by repeal, the manner of obtaining review is by writ of error. See Jones v. Escambia Land & Manufacturing Co., 55 Fla. 783, 46 Sou. Rep. 290, and cases cited. Appellate review of proceedings to re-establish proceedings, papers and files according to the procedure set up by Section 5072 C. G. L., 3264 R. G. S., with reference to pending suits, will be either as at Commo…
-
Wrens Inv. Corp. v. Amos, 107 Fla. 324 (Fla. 1932)…peal is a proper method to review a final order in such proceedings, (see Amos v. Conkling, 99 Fla. 206, 126 So. 283; Heebner v. Orange City, 44 Fla. 159, 32 So. 879; Clinton v. Colclough, 54 Fla. 520, 44 So. 787; Jones vs. Escambia Land & Mfg. Co., 55 Fla. 783, 46 So. 290.) there is no merit in the contention o'f the Wrens Investment Corporation for a review of the order of the Circuit Judge refusing to confirm a sale on its bid, because the bid was made subject to confirmation or rejection by the Circuit…
-
State v. Edmunds, 114 Fla. 443 (Fla. 1934)…rce v. Thackeray, 13 Fla. 574. See Hall v. State, 88 Fla. 239, 101 So. 847, Roberson v. State, 45 Fla. 94, 34 So. 294. The statute prescribes the procedure. F. C. & W. Ry. Co. v. Bostwick, 55 Fla. 665, 45 So. 1033; Jones v. Escambia Land & Mfg. Co., 55 Fla. 783, 46 So. 290; Selph v. Purvis, 57 Fla. 188, 49 So. 289; Hart v. Smith, 17 Fla. 767; 19 Am. & Eng. Enc. Law (2nd Ed.) 559; Davidson v. Powers, decided at this term. Courts of equity have power to re-establish lost papers other than their own records…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Wash Campbell v. Skinner Mfg. Co., 53 Fla. 632 (Fla. 1907)
- Heebner v. Town of Orange City, 44 Fla. 159 (Fla. 1902)
- Clinton v. Colclough, 54 Fla. 520 (Fla. 1907)
- Montgomery v. Thomas, 40 Fla. 450 (Fla. 1898)
- Trabue v. Williams, 46 Fla. 228 (Fla. 1903)
- Fla. Cent. R.R. Co. & the Seaboard Air Line Ry. v. Bostwick, 53 Fla. 124 (Fla. 1907)