T. H. WALKER ET AL. APPELLANTS,
v.
STANDARD LUMBER COMPANY, APPELLEE

Fla. | 1929-12-07
Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur., Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.
98 Fla. 913 Florida Supreme Court (1929)

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.

Synopsis

The Florida Supreme Court affirmed a lower court's injunction against trespass, holding that the defendants failed to establish a superior claim to the property despite challenging the validity of the complainant's tax deed.


Holding

No, the defendants did not establish a superior claim. The tax deed was prima facie evidence of title and not patently invalid, and the defendants' evidence of possession was insufficient to require the complainant to prove a perfect title.


Key Quotes

“The tax deed is by statute prima facie evidence of title and is not patently invalid”

Establishes the initial validity and evidentiary weight of the complainant's tax deed.

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The complainant filed a bill for an injunction against trespass, alleging ownership in fee simple of wild and unimproved lands. The complainant claime…

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.


Opinion of the Court
Per Curiam.

Per Curiam.

The bill of complaint brought for an injunction against trespass upon lands, alleges that the complainant is now and has been for many years the owner in fee simple of the described lands, exercising all right of possession, ownership and control thereover of which said lands are susceptible; that said lands are wild and unimproved lands, etc.

Defendants appealed from a decree for the' complainant.

It appears that complainant claimed title under a tax deed which defendants contended was void; and the defend ants claimed to be in possession, holding adversely. The tax deed is by statute prima facie evidence of title and is not patently invalid; and .the evidence as to possession of the defendants was not of such a nature as to require the complainant to show a perfect title, even if the tax deed is invalid, which does not clearly appear, the defendant showing no connection with any title by adverse possession or otherwise to the lands, but relying merely upon desultory uses of the wild and unimproved lands for stock ranges, etc.

Rehearing denied.

Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur. Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw