W. J. CASON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
C. O. TEATE, 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 affirmed a judgment in a case presented on a writ of error, rejecting the defendant's motion to strike the transcript and finding that the plaintiff's assignment of error claiming the verdict was contrary to law was manifestly without merit.
The judgment is affirmed. The court rejected the motion to strike the transcript, found that the assignments of error (except one) were based on matters not in the certified record and thus could not be reviewed, and determined that the one assignment that could be considered—that the verdict was contrary to law—was manifestly without merit.
“No sufficient basis for visiting upon plaintiff in error a penalty so harsh as striking the transcript of the record is made to appear.”
The court's rationale for denying the motion to strike the transcript despite procedural defects.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved a verdict that was responsive to the issues made by the pleadings and resulted in a judgment in proper form. The plaintiff in error …
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 Assignments Of Error cases and more on FLexlaw
West, J.
This case is presented on motion to strike from the files the transcript of the record. The ground of the motion is alleged non-compliance by plaintiff in error with rules of procedure on Writ of Error. No sufficient basis for visiting upon plaintiff in error a penalty so harsh as striking the transcript of the record is made to appear. So the motion will be denied.
However, an examination of the record has disclosed a situation permitting final disposition of the case at this time. The first twenty-one pages only, which contain the, record proper, are certified by the Clerk as required by the rule for making up transcripts of records for this Court. Following this certificate are fifty additional pages, of what purports to be either the original or a copy of a bill of exceptions in the ease. These pages being without any certificate of correctness by the Clerk cannot be considered. The assignments of error, with one possible exception, are based upon matters which do not appear in the record. The exception is an assignment that the verdict is contrary to the law. While of a general nature, we have nevertheless considered the fragment of the case presented by it. The declaration does not wholly fail to state a cause of action. The verdict appears to be responsive to the issue made by the pleadings. The judgment is in due form. The assignment is manifestly without merit,
No question being presented by any assignment of error which may be reviewed by this Court, the judgment should be affirmed. F. C. & P. R. R. Co. v. Abrams, 35 Fla. 514, 17 South. Rep. 639; Lanier v. Shayne, 86 Fla. 385, 98 South. Rep. 71.
Affirmed.
Taylor, C. J., and Whitfield, and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Cent. & Peninsular R.R. Co. v. St. Clair-Abrams, 35 Fla. 514 (Fla. 1895)
- Lanier v. Shayne, 86 Fla. 385 (Fla. 1923)