THE BLACKSHEAR MANUFACTURING COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
ADA MCCLENNY, 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.
Ada McClenny sought to enjoin the sale of land titled in her name that was levied upon and advertised for sale under an execution issued on a judgment against her husband and another party. The Florida Supreme Court affirmed the perpetual injunction, holding that property owned by a wife cannot be levied upon and sold under a judgment against her husband.
The court held that the attempted sale was unauthorized because the property was legally titled to Ada McClenny, not her husband, and therefore was not subject to levy and sale under an execution against him. Equity will enjoin such a sale regardless of whether the wife holds the property under secret trust for her husband.
“In this situation the attempted sale of the property was unauthorized. Even if it was held by the complainant under a secret trust for her husband it was not subject to levy and sale under an execution at law upon a judgment recovered against him.”
Establishes the core holding that property titled to a wife cannot be levied upon under a judgment against her husband, even in secret trust situations
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Blackshear Manufacturing Company obtained a judgment against B. D. Hires and C. B. McClenny (Ada McClenny's husband) and caused an execution to be…
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 Cloud On Title cases and more on FLexlaw
West, J.
This-suit was'brought by Ada McClenny, who was joined by her husband C. B. McClenny, against The Blackshear Manufacturing Company, a corporation, and P. G. Ramsey as Sheriff of Alachua County.
The bill was filed on the 29th of November, 1912, and the primary object of the suit was to restrain the sale of certain lands which are described in the bill of which the complainant Ada McClenny is alleged to be the owner in fee simple.
The bill alleges that some time prior to the institution of the suit The Blackshear Manufacturing Company, a corporation, one of the defendants, obtained a judgment, the exact date of which is unknown to the complainants, against B. D. Hires and C. B. McClenny for an amount unknown-to complainant; that said company-had caused an execution to be issued upon said judgment and placed in the hands of said' sheriff who had levied same upon the lands described in the bill and had-advertised said lands for sale -as the property of C. B. McClenny,
It was further alleged that a-Sale of-said lands under said alleged execution-and a-sheriff’s deed therefor would be a cloud upon complainant’s title to said lands, and a copy of the notice of sale was attached to the bill as an exhibit.
The prayer was for an injunction and-for general relief. ’
A temporary restraining order was issued on the same day by a Court Commissioner in' the absence of the Circuit'Judge from the county.
The bill was not demurred to but on the 7th day of July, 1913, an answer was filed by the defendant The Blackshear Manufacturing Company, denying the ownership of said lands by the complainant Ada McClenny, and admitting that it had caused said sheriff to levy .upon and advertise said land for sale by virtue of -an execution issued upon a judgment which it had ‘obtained against said D. B. Hires and C. B. McClenny.'
Testimony was taken before a Special Master appointed by the court for-this purpose who -filed'his' report On June 27th, 1916, whereupon a final decree was rendered by the Circuit Judge making the temporary injunction theretofore entered in said cause perpetual. :
The appeal is from this final decree and the errors assigned are that (1) the court erred in finding and decreeing the equities to be with.the complainant; (2) the court erred in making the temporary injunction perpetual; (3) the court erred in'considering the testimony of Ada McClenny; (4) the court erred in declining to dissolve' the temporary injunction, and (5) the court erred in denying the''motion of defendant to strike all the testimony of the witness Ada McClenny.
In the consideration of this case we are met at the very threshold with the fact that the legal title to the property levied upon and advertised for sale is in the complainant Ada McClenny. Title to the property was acquired by her by deed in the usual form and with the usual covenants of warranty from The Cummer Lumber. Company, a corporation,' to her dated the 1st day of January, 1904. There can be no controversy on this point. It was conceded.by counsel for appellant in his oral argument in this court. The execution under which the property 'is advertised for sale was issued upon a judgment recovered against D. B. Hires and C. B. McClenny, the husband of Ada McClenny.
In this situation the attempted sale of the property was unauthorized. Even if it was held by the complainant under a secret trust for her husband it was not subject to levy and sale under an execution at law upon a judgment recovered against him. Guggenheimer et al. v. Davidson, decided here at the last term; Thalheimer Bros. v. Tischler, 55 Fla. 796, 46 South. Rep. 514. In such a case equity will enjoin the sale of the property levied upon. Hill v. Meinhart, 39 Fla. 111, 21 South. Rep. 805.
Since the property of the complainant advertised for sale was not subject to levy and sale under the execution, other questions presented become immaterial and a consideration of them unnecessary.
The decree appealed from is. affirmed.
Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield and Ellis, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City of Coral Gables v. Hepkins, 107 Fla. 778 (Fla. 1932)…Holmes v. Marshall, 145 Cal. 777, 79 Pac. 534, 104 A. S. R. 86, 2 Ann. Cas. 88, 19 L. R. A. 67. And in cases of unauthorized levies upon non-subject real property, a remedy in equity may be appropriate in many cases. Blackshear Mfg. Co. v. McClenny, 75 Fla. 308, 78 Sou. Rep. 269. In the case now before us on writ of error, the motion was filed under the statute hereinbefore referred to, and sought to have a stay of all the proceedings under the execution, as well as a perpetual stay of any other or furthe…
-
First State Bank of Clermont v. Fitch, 105 Fla. 435 (Fla. 1932)…he husband, is not subject to levy and sale under an execution “at law” issued upon .'a judgment against the husband, but it is an equitable asset, and can be reached only by proper proceedings in a court of equity. Blackshear Mfg. Co. v. McClenny, 75 Fla. 308; 78 So. 269; Guggenheimer et al. v. Davidson, 74 Fla. 485, 77 So. 266. It is seen, therefore, that a judgment in an attachment suit at law would not reach the property in the instant ease standing in the name of the wife. Directing our attention…
-
Trueman Fertilizer Co. v. Fritz Stein, 157 Fla. 769 (Fla. 1946)…izer Company. The lower court correctly restrained the sale of the property. See Macfarlane v. Dorsey, 49 Fla. 341, 38 So. 512; Thalheimer v. Tischler, 55 Fla. 796, 46 So. 514, 17 L. R. A. (NS) 841, 15 Ann. Cas. 863; Blackshear Mfg. Co. v. McClenny, 75 Fla. 308, 78 So. 269; Guggenheimer & Co. v. Davidson, 74 Fla. 485, 77 So. 266. Fritz Stein and wife filed this suit in equity — praying for a permanent injunction against L. R. Baker, as Sheriff, from selling the described lands under the writ of execution…
Authorities Cited
- Thalheimer v. Tischler, 55 Fla. 796 (Fla. 1908)
- Hill v. Meinhard, 39 Fla. 111 (Fla. 1897)