LUCERNE PROPERTIES, INC., A CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN D. HOBBS AND J. E. MCCULLOUGH, 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 and remanded a case because a prior appeal had already transferred jurisdiction, rendering subsequent court orders void. The Court found that the initial appeal from an order sustaining a motion to strike parts of an answer operated as a supersedeas, halting further proceedings.
No, subsequent court orders made after an appeal that operated as a supersedeas are void because the initial appeal transferred jurisdiction to the appellate court, superseding all further proceedings in the lower court.
“and it appearing to the Court that the appeal, taken in this cause on the 23rd day of June, 1927, from the interlocutory order made on the 17th day of June, 1927, sustaining the motion of the complainant, J, J. Vaill, to strike parts of the answer of Lucerne Properties, Inc., to the complainants' bill of complaint, operated as a supersedeas and stay of proceedings in said cause”
Establishes that the initial appeal acted as a supersedeas and stayed proceedings.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceLucerne Properties, Inc. appealed an interlocutory order from June 17, 1927, which sustained a motion to strike parts of its answer. This appeal, file…
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 Jurisdiction Transfer cases and more on FLexlaw
Per Curiam.
Upon an inspection and consideration of the record in this cause and the briefs of counsel therein filed and the Court being advised of its judgment in the premises,' and it appearing to the Court that the appeal, taken in this cause on the 23rd day of June, 1927, from the interlocutory order made on the 17th day of June, 1927, sustaining the motion of the complainant, J, J. Vaill, to strike parts of the answer of Lucerne Properties, Inc., to the complainants’ bill of complaint, operated as a supersedeas and stay of proceedings in said cause and that all proceedings in said cause subsequently taken by the.court up to and including the order appealed from in this case, which was made the 6th day of October, 1927, were without authority of law and inoperative and void because of the former appeal which transferred jurisdiction of said cause to this Court and all proceedings therein were superseded and stayed, therefore;
It is considered and ordered that the decree and orders appealed from be reversed and the cause is remanded with directions to proceed therein anew from the order first appealed from made on the -17th day of June, 1927.
Reversed.
Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur. Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Waltham A. Condo. Ass'n v. Vill. Mgmt., Inc., 330 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)…contention is unsound, as has many times been decided by this court. See Hartman v. Pool, 103 Fla. 858, 139 So. 589; Willey v. Hoggson, 89 Fla. 446, 105 So. 126; Moody v. Volusia County, 90 Fla. 864, 107 So. 185; Lucerne Properties, Inc., v. Hobbs, 98 Fla. 162, 123 So. 571. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is exclusive only as to the subject covered by the appeal. Willey v. Hoggson, supra. Where there is no supersedeas taken in an appeal from an interlocutory order, the lower court may proceed furt…
-
Crichlow v. Equitable Life Assurance Soc'y of the United States, 113 Fla. 668 (Fla. 1933)…d, as has many times been decided by this Court. See Hartman v. Pool, 103 Fla. 858, 139 South. Rep. 589; Willey v. Hoggson, 89 Fla. 446, 105 South. Rep. 126; Moody v. Volusia Co., 90 Fla. 864, 107 South. Rep. 185; Lucerne Properties, Inc., v. Hobbs, 98 Fla. 162, 123 South. Rep. 571. The jurisdiction of the Supreme Court is exclusive only as to the subject covered by the appeal. Willey v. Hoggson, supra. [*671] Where'there is no supersedeas taken in an appeal from an interlocutory order the lower court may…
-
Hartman v. Pool, 103 Fla. 858 (Fla. 1931)…e court on the undisposed of interlocutory appeal pending at the time of entry of such final decree. Willey v. Hoggson Corporation, 89 Fla. 446, 105 Son. Rep. 126; Moody v. Volusia County, 90 Fla. 864, 107 Sou. Rep. 185; Lucerne Properties v. Hobbs, 98 Fla. 162, 123 Sou. Rep. 571. And, as pointed out in Willey v. Hoggson, supra,, the final decree may sometimes so cure the errors complained of on the interlocutory appeal as to warrant the dismissal of that appeal as moot. See 9th headnote. The appellants,…