E. J. KERSEY, ET UX., APPELLANTS,
v.
SINCLAIR REFINING COMPANY, APPELLEE

Fla. | 1933-04-25
Davis, C. J., and Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur., Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
109 Fla. 528 Florida Supreme Court (1933) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 147 So. 844 · 147 So. 910
Cited by 22 cases
Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

This is a foreclosure case in which the final decree was against the mortgagors. The order striking the answer of the mortgagor’s wife questioning the validity of her acknowledgment of the mortgage was properly made by the court on the authority of Herald v. Hardin, 95 Fla. 889, 116 Sou. Rep. 863. The final decree foreclosing the mortgage was entered after full hearing on the merits and does not appear to be clearly erroneous, so it must be affirmed on the authority of Tunnicliffe v. Volusia County Bond & Mortgage Co. (Fla.), 137 Sou. Rep. 885.

Affirmed.

Davis, C. J., and Ellis and Terrell, J. J., concur.

Whitfield, P. J., and Brown and Buford, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • Kalmutz v. Kalmutz, 299 So. 2d 30 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)
    …temporary order affecting the merits of the cause involved in the main appeal or which would have the effect of rendering the mni. appeal moot. Willey v. W. T. Hoggson Corporation, 1925, 89 Fla. 446, 105 So. 126; State v. Robles, 1933, 109 Fla. 528, 147 So. 910. Unquestionably the trial court has the power to grant temporary relief pending appeal and possesses the inherent power and authority to take such action as justice and equity requires. It would appear, however, that when the jurisdiction of the app…
  • Waltham A. Condo. Ass'n v. Vill. Mgmt., Inc., 330 So. 2d 227 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976)
    …ellate court’s jurisdiction or render moot its labors. Our analysis of the law on this subject is supported by the clear principles of law enunciated on the subject of lower court jurisdiction with supersedeas. In State ex rel. Martarano v. Robles, 109 Fla. 528, 532, 147 So. 910, 911-12 (1933), the Supreme Court stated: “ . . . since a supersedeas is ordinarily to stay or suspend the execution of a decree already rendered, and not to suspend other proceedings in the cause further adjudicating the rights o…
  • Sexton v. Panning Lumber Co., 260 So. 2d 898 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)
    …ord that no abuse of that discretion has been demonstrated. Assuming arguendo the propriety of an interlocutory appeal in this case, we believe the law of this state as to further trial proceedings was basically stated in State v. Robles, Fla.1933, 147 So. 910, as follows: “. . . [S]ince a supersedeas is ordinarily to stay or suspend the execution of a decree already rendered, and not to suspend other proceedings in the cause further adjudicating the rights of the parties, unless to do so would, in effec…

Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw