A. Y. OATES, ET UX.,
v.
NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE CO.
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 lower court's decree, finding that controlling questions had already been decided in favor of the appellant in prior cases. The court noted that subscribing witnesses or acknowledging officers generally cannot impeach their own certificates.
Yes, the controlling questions have been decided in favor of the appellant in prior cases. The court also indicated that subscribing witnesses or acknowledging officers generally cannot impeach their own certificates.
“The decree appealed from was entered on the 26th day of August, 1931. Since that time the controlling questions involved in this appeal have been determined in accordance with the contentions of the appellant by this Court in the cases of Menendez, et al., v. Rodriguez, opinion filed July 18, 1932, 106 Fla. 214, 143 Sou. 223, and McEwen, et ux., v. Schenck, opinion filed January 18, 1933, reported 146 Sou. 839.”
Establishes that prior case law controls the outcome.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants appealed a decree entered on August 26, 1931. The controlling legal questions in the appeal had been addressed by the Florida Supreme Court…
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.
We have examined the record and briefs filed in this case and have also heard the questions involved presented by counsel in oral argument.
*679The decree appealed from was entered on the 26th day of August, 1931. Since that time the controlling questions involved in this appeal have been determined in accordance with the contentions of the appellant by this Court in the cases of Menendez, et al., v. Rodriguez, opinion filed July 18, 1932, 106 Fla. 214, 143 Sou. 223, and McEwen, et ux., v. Schenck, opinion filed January 18, 1933, reported 146 Sou. 839.
We do not mean to hold that subscribing witnesses to a written instrument or an officer who the instrument shows to have taken the acknowledgment can be heard to impeach their respective certificates.
Therefore, the decree appealed from should be reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings. It is so ordered.
Reversed and remanded.
Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell and Buord, J. J., and Hutchison, Circuit Judge, concur.
Brown, J., not participating because of illness.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Oates, 122 Fla. 540 (Fla. 1935)…rity thereof and without notice of any defects therein.” Defendants appealed from the final decree and from the order denying a rehearing. The final decree was reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings. Oates v. New York Life Ins. Co., 113 Fla. 678, 152 So. 671. Upon being remanded, further testimony was taken by a special master and by depositions. Thereupon on August 3, 1934, a final decree was rendered for the defendants in which it is stated that “There is no question in this cause but t…1 / 5
-
The N.Y. Life Ins. Co. v. Oates, 141 Fla. 164 (Fla. 1939)…cited in New York Life Ins. Co. v. Oates, 122 Fla. 540, 166 So. 269. In this case the husband and’ wife owned the property by the entireties. It was their homestead. Menendez v. Rodriguez, 106 Fla. 214, 143 So. 223; Oates v. New York Life Ins. Co., 113 Fla. 678, 152 So. 671. The husband solicited the loan from the mortgage com [*179] pany. There is testimony that the husband said he would have the mortgage duly executed and acknowledged before an officer other than the notary in the mortgagee’s office. Wh…
-
Harkins v. Holt, 124 Fla. 774 (Fla. 1936)…a husband and wife as an estate by the entireties could acquire the status of homestead property. That such property so held may become the homestead has been definitely determined by this Court in Oates v. New York Life Insurance Co., 113 Fla. 678, 152 So. 671. The decree appealed from should be affirmed and it is so ordered. Affirmed. Ellis, P. J., and Terrell, J., concur. [*779] Whitfield, C. J., and Brown and Davis, J. J., concur in the opinion and judgment.…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Inez Menendez and Jose Menendez v. Rodriguez, 106 Fla. 214 (Fla. 1932)
- McEwen v. Schenck, 108 Fla. 119 (Fla. 1933)