LORENZO A. WILSON AND W. M. MASON, JR., COPARTNERS DOING BUSINESS AS WILSON-MASON COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
ROSA C. DUNCAN, AS EXECUTRIX OF THE WILL OF L. A. DUNCAN, DECEASED, APPELLEE
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 denied appellants' motion to modify a supersedeas order and bond from a prior appeal, holding that once the Court had affirmed the lower court's order and remanded the case, matters regarding the supersedeas became issues for the Circuit Court to address.
The motion to modify the supersedeas order and bond is denied because once the Supreme Court affirmed the order and remanded the case to the Circuit Court, the supersedeas order and bond became matters within the Circuit Court's jurisdiction, and any remedy appellants seek must be pursued there.
“The decree of this court affirming on appeal the order overruling the demurrer to the bill of complaint is the law of the case and the mandate as to that has been transmitted to the lower court.”
Establishes that the prior Supreme Court affirmance and mandate became binding and were now within the Circuit Court's jurisdiction.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants Wilson-Mason Company had demurred to a bill of complaint involving a large sum of money allegedly in their custody. The demurrer was overru…
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 Supersedeas Bond cases and more on FLexlaw
Whitfield, J.
A motion by appellants is made for “an appropriate order providing for the modification of the order of supersedeas made and entered herein under date of November 12, '1920, and for a like modification of the supersedeas bond filed herein on November 18, 1920, so that the condition of the said supersedeas bond shall not require of these appellants to well and truly abide by and perform any final decree rendered herein and pay to the complainant such sum or sums of money as shall be awarded thereby. ”
The supersedeas order and bond referred to were predicated upon an appeal taken to-an order overruling a'demurrer to a bill of complaint involving a large sum of money alleged to be in the custody of the copartners who demurred to the bill. The order overruling the demurrer to the bill of complaint was affirmed (Duncan v. Wilson, 82 Fla. 232, 89 South. Rep. 496), and the cause was remanded to the Circuit Court. Subsequently other proceedings were had in the cause and an appeal is now pending in this court from other interlocutory orders made in the cause. This motion is made upon the theory that the conditions of the litigation have changed by the payment of money into the court and by the fixing and giving of a supersedeas bond for only $1,000.00 on the present appeal. The decree of this court affirming on appeal the order overruling the demurrer to the bill of complaint is the law of the case and the mandate as to that has been transmitted to the lower court. The supersedeas order and bond referred to are matters now in the Circuit Court; and if the movants are entitled to any remedy in the premises it is to be had in the Circuit Court.
The motion is denied.
Taylor, C. J., and Ellis, Browne and West, J. J., concur.