A. B. VANCE, ASTOR INVESTMENT COMANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, BANK OF BAY BISCAYNE, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
BLISS PROPERTIES, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, AND ALONZO O. BLISS, JR., 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 reversed a final decree, holding that the lower court's adjudication was not supported by the pleadings. The case was remanded for further amendment or additional pleadings.
No, the pleadings failed to present the issue that was adjudicated by the final decree.
“The pleadings fail to present the is'sue which is adjudicated by the decree.”
This quote states the core reason for the reversal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA suit was filed for cancellation of a real estate contract, to nullify mortgages and other recorded instruments, cancel their records, and repossess …
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 Cancellation Of Contract cases and more on FLexlaw
This case is before us on appeal from final decree which brings up for consideration the entire record.
The suit was for cancellation of a contract for the sale of real estate to decree null and void certain mortgages and other recorded instruments relating to such real estate, to cancel the records thereof and to repossess1 the complainant of the real estate involved.
The defendants answered, praying affirmative relief, which answer was filed subject to demurrers. The demurrers-were overruled.
From the final decree it appears that the Chancellor considered the bill of complaint as one to foreclose a vendor’s lien on the property involved. Such decree would be warranted on the evidence if there existed a basis for it in the pleadings.
- The pleadings fail to present the is'sue which is adjudicated by the decree.
The record discloses no other reversible error.
For the reasons stated, the decree is reversed and the cause remanded to the Circuit Court with directions that the same be returned to the rolls for further amendment of the pleadings, or additional pleadings, under such terms and conditions as may be awarded by the. Chancellor. It is so ordered. .
Reversed, with directions.
. Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell and Bu- . ford, J. J., concur.
Brown, J., concurs in the conclusion.
concurring. — I think that in a proper case the conclusions of the Master were approximately correct, at least relief along that line would be appropriate, but I see no reason for discussing this matter. The case made by the bill was one to declare a forfeiture under the contract and declare it to be discharged and cancelled and to invalidate certain other deeds. The relief granted was inappropriate to the case made in the bill.
Brown, J., concurs'.
[*390] Ellis, J.,
concurring. — I think that in a proper case the conclusions of the Master were approximately correct, at least relief along that line would be appropriate, but I see no reason for discussing this matter. The case made by the bill was one to declare a forfeiture under the contract and declare it to be discharged and cancelled and to invalidate certain other deeds. The relief granted was inappropriate to the case made in the bill.
Brown, J., concurs'.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Trushin v. State, 425 So. 2d 1126 (Fla. 1982)…the trial level. Once an appellate court has jurisdiction it may, if it finds it necessary to do so, consider any item that may affect the case. See Whitted; Miami Gardens, Inc. v. Conway, 102 So. 2d 622 (Fla.1958); Vance v. Bliss Properties, Inc., 109 Fla. 388, 149 So. 370 (1933). Only the constitutionality of the statute under which Trushin was convicted was the kind of alleged error which must be considered for the first time on appeal because the arguments surrounding the statute’s validity raised a f…
-
Henderson v. Antonacci, 62 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 1952)…which do not necessarily inhere in those questions which are presented cannot be decided by the Court. Pensacola & Georgia R. R. Co. v. Spratt, 12 Fla. 26, 91 Am.Dec. 747; Briles v. Bradford, 54 Fla. 501, 44 So. 937; Vance v. Bliss Properties, Inc., 109 Fla. 388, 149 So. 370. There are many sound reasons behind this rule. Not the least of such reasons is the fact that gratuitous rulings by a court are ofttimes precipitate, ill-considered and, except for the fact that they cannot constitute predicates for re…
-
Alexander v. State, 450 So. 2d 1212 (Fla. 4th DCA 1984)…t has jurisdiction it may, if it finds it necessary to do so, consider any item that may affect the case. See Whitted, [v. State, 362 So. 2d 668 (Fla.1978) ]; Miami Gardens, Inc. v. Conway, 102 So. 2d 622 (Fla.1958); Vance v. Bliss Properties, Inc., 109 Fla. 388, 149 So. 370 (1933). [*1216] Id. at 1129-30. It should be noted that a distinction is drawn between facial unconstitutionality of the statute and unconstitutionality of the application of the statute to the facts of the particular case. The former m…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence