ANDERSON ROUNTREE, JR., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
ALEX ROUNTREE, JR., ET AL., 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 court held that plaintiffs failed to prove title or right to partition, thus their claims for partition and accounting were properly denied.
Plaintiffs, claiming as heirs of Anderson Rountree, sought partition and an accounting of family homestead property. Record title was in Carolina Barr…
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 Partition Suit cases and more on FLexlaw
This is the second appearance of this cause in this court. See Rountree v. Rountree, Fla.1954, 72 So.2d 794. The plaintiffs now appeal from a final decree dismissing the cause with prejudice. The basis of the decree was that the plaintiffs had, “failed to prove by competent evidence the material allegations of the complaint.”
The appellants urge that the effect of the decree is to establish the right of a brother to obtain title to the family homestead by adverse possession as against his own brothers and sisters. We do not find this proposition presented. The plaintiffs prayed for partition, an accounting and incidental relief. This relief was denied because the plaintiff did not prove a basis for it. A great deal of the testimony was offered in an attempt to establish the title of the plaintiffs in the land sought to be partitioned. It is apparent that the chancellor found this title was not proved.
Record title was in one Carolina Barrett, who was long since deceased. Plaintiffs asserted title as the heirs of one Anderson Rountree, who was also the father of the principal defendant, Alex Rountree. The evidence failed to establish title in Anderson Rountree or that Alex Rountree claimed under said Anderson Rountree. In order to maintain a complaint for partition the plaintiffs must show title or a right to partition. Williams v. City of St. Petersburg, 57 Fla. 544, 48 So. 754. Further, a partition suit is not the proper proceeding in which to settle a disputed title. Dallam v. Sanchez, 56 Fla. 779, 47 So. 871. Even where plaintiffs might have an equitable interest in the land, partition is not available. Williams v. Ricou, 143 Fla. 360, 368, 196 So. 667. All of the relief prayed was dependent upon the right to partition.
Affirmed.
TERRELL, C. J., and THOMAS, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dietrich v. Winters, 798 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…hall receive 50 percent of the proceeds of the sale after all costs and fees are deducted from the gross sale receipts. In order to maintain a complaint for partition, the plaintiff must show title or a right to partition. See Rountree v. Rountree, 101 So. 2d 43 (Fla.1958). Where title is not established in the plaintiff, partition is not available even if the plaintiff might have an equitable interest in the land. Id. at 44. Thus, we hold that the trial court erred when it ordered the partition of the land…
-
Magally Diaz v. Sec. Union Title Ins. Co., 639 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…mmensurate with their services rendered and of benefit to the partition, to be determined on equitable principles in proportion to his interest. In order to seek partition, the claimant must show title or a right to partition. Rountree v. Rountree, 101 So. 2d 43, 44 (Fla.1958). To prove title in a partition proceeding, prior actions may have been instituted to establish or protect title to the property. Kealamakia v. Unknown Heirs of Kamoehalau, 68 Haw. 429, 717 P. 2d 516, 518 (1986); Buchanan Realty Corp.…
-
Anderson Rountree, Jr. v. Rountree, 101 So. 2d 44 (Fla. 1958)…PER CURIAM. This is a companion case to Rountree v. Rountree, Fla., 101 So. 2d 43, and is rendered moot by the disposition of the issues therein. Appeal dismissed TERRELL, C. J., and THOMAS, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., and PEARSON, District Judge, concur.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Dallam v. Sanchez, 56 Fla. 779 (Fla. 1908)
- Williams v. Ricou, 143 Fla. 360 (Fla. 1940)
- Rountree v. Rountree, 72 So. 2d 794 (Fla. 1954)
- Williams v. The City of St. Petersburg, 57 Fla. 544 (Fla. 1909)