THE KNIGHTS OF PYTHIAS OF N. A. S. A. E. A. AND A., A CORPORATION, PLAINTIFFS IN ERROR,
v.
SAM MORGAN, AN INFANT, BY D. L. THRASHER, HIS GUARDIAN AND NEXT FRIEND, 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 reversed a judgment because it was entered in favor of 'Sam Morgan' when the lawsuit was filed by 'Samuel Morgan by his guardian and next friend'. The court found this discrepancy to be a material error, though not one requiring a new trial.
No, the judgment does not conform to the pleadings. The court held that the discrepancy between the plaintiff's name in the pleadings and the judgment constitutes an error.
“On writ of error no material or harmful errors or procedure appear, except that the judgment does not conform to the pleadings in that the action is in the name of Samuel Morgan by his guardian and next friend, while the judgment is in favor of Sam Morgan.”
This quote explains the specific error identified by the court.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff, Samuel Morgan, filed a lawsuit through his guardian and next friend. A verdict was rendered for the plaintiff, and the trial court ente…
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.
— The action herein was brought by Samuel Morgan by D. L. Thrasher, his guardian and next friend. Verdict was rendered “for the plaintiff on the issues joined.” The following judgment was entered on the verdict:
“Wherefore, it is ordered and considered by the Court that the plaintiff, Sam Morgan, do have and recover of and from the defendant, Knights of Pythias of N. A., S. A., E., A., A., and A., a corporation, his said damages in the sum of $456.89.” . On writ of error no material or harmful errors or procedure appear, except that the judgment does not conform to the pleadings in that the action is in the name of Samuel Morgan by his guardian and next friend, while the judgment is in favor of Sam Morgan. For this erroneous entry of a judgment a new trial will not be granted, but the judgment is reversed and the cause re manded for a proper judgment to be entered herein. See Hunter v. State, 64 Fla. 315, 60 South. Rep. 786; Taylor v. State, 67 Fla. 127, 64 South. Rep. 454; Webster v. State, 47 Fla. 108, 36 South. Rep. 584.
Reversed for a proper judgment.
All concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Webster v. State, 47 Fla. 108 (Fla. 1904)
- Taylor v. State, 67 Fla. 127 (Fla. 1914)
- Hunter v. State, 64 Fla. 315 (Fla. 1912)