JAMES MCKELL, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN S. JACKSON AND MARGABET F. JACKSON, 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.
The Florida Supreme Court addressed a procedural objection to the form of testimony in a transcript on appeal, holding that while testimony must be properly certified, narrative form is permissible and encouraged in both common law and equity cases when properly approved by the trial judge.
The Court held that testimony may be converted to narrative form in transcripts, provided it is properly certified by the trial judge after notice to the opposing party. While the motion to strike and dismiss was denied, the appellant was given thirty days to amend the transcript to comply with proper certification procedures.
“We approve the practice of reducing evidence appearing in transcripts of the record in both common law and equity cases to narrative form.”
Establishes the Court's endorsement of narrative form for testimony in transcripts as a permissible and desirable practice.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant McKell appealed a case to the Florida Supreme Court, but the appellees Jackson filed a motion to strike the transcript and dismiss the a…
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
This is a motion to strike the transcript and dismiss the appeal on the principal ground that the transcript purports to show the testimony of witnesses in narrative form, whereas there is no authority for transposing testimony reported by a master in a chancery cause from questions and answers to narrative form, in the course of preparation of the transcript of the record for appeal to this Court.
¥e sustain the objection made. But it does not follow that the appeal itself should be dismissed, or the entire transcript stricken, because the evidence in the record is stated in narrative form without proper authority therefor.
We approve the practice of reducing evidence appearing in transcripts of the reeohd in both common law and equity eases to narrative form. And if that practice were more generally observed here, it would greatly lighten the labors of this Court and facilitate the dispatch of cases required to be considered by us.
In common law cases the testimony can be converted from *303questions and answers to narrative form in the course of preparation of a bill of exceptions. *
In chancery eases the same transportation can be made by having a complete and accurate statement of the testimony gotten up in narrative form and presented to the Chancellor, to be examined, approved and certified to by him as being correct, all after the notice to the opposite party. Such practice is now general on appeals' in the Federal Courts, and we believe it may be followed to good purposes in our own chancery procedure on appeal. We therefore approve and commend it as good practice.
The motion to strike and dismiss is denied, without prejudice to the right of appellant to renew the motion unless the transcript is amended to conform to this opinion within thirty days from the date of the filing of this order. Permission to withdraw the transcript for purposes of amendment is hereby given, with leave to apply to the Circuit Judge for approval and certification of the testimony in narrative form.
Whitfield, P.J. and Terrell, J., concur.
Buford, C.J. and Ellis and Brown, J.J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Vliet v. Anthony, 119 Fla. 638 (Fla. 1935)…ence as so transposed and included in said transcript of record, had been examined, [*640] approved and certified by the Chancellor, after notice, in manner and form as set forth in the decision of the Supreme Court of Florida in McKell v. Jackson, 144 Sou. Rep. 670. “A. Melrose Lamar, “Solicitor for Anna K. Vliet, Appellant. “S. C. Kearley, “J. Leo Chapman, “Solicitors for Winifred Clarke Anthony and her husband, Roscoe T. Anthony, Appellees. “Celoman & Cook, “Solicitors for Central Farmers Trust Company,…1 / 2