JOHN MATHEW ADEN SYKES, APPELLANT,
v.
O. W. BOOTH, JR., APPELLEE
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.
Sykes appeals a summary judgment in a declaratory judgment action concerning his right to hunt for buried treasure on Booth's land. Sykes had acquired, through assignment, Faulk's original 1949 agreement with Booth permitting one excavation, but the court found this right had been abandoned and therefore held Sykes took nothing by the assignment.
The court held that Faulk abandoned his rights under the July 11, 1949 agreement, and consequently Sykes took nothing by the October 1958 assignment. The court also found that the right to excavate for buried treasure is a personal property right, not a lien or interest in real property.
“The Court, having examined the instrument finds that one excavation, as set out in the written instrument, dated July 11, 1949, was abandoned and it is the finding of this Court that said instrument and various assignments are now not a lien or interest in the property described in the complaint.”
The trial court's finding that Faulk abandoned his excavation rights under the original 1949 agreement, rendering the assignment to Sykes invalid.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn 1949, Faulk entered an agreement with Booth allowing Faulk to hunt for buried treasure on Booth's land, limited to one excavation. In 1951, Faulk a…
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 Declaratory Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
On July 11, 1949, one Faulk entered into an agreement with appellee Booth, defendant in the trial court whereby the said Faulk was given the right to hunt for buried treasure on lands owned by appellee, but limited to one excavation.
On May 7, 1951, the said Faulk and ap-pellee Booth entered into an agreement with one Rowe whereby the said Rowe was given authority to hunt for buried treasure on said properties with no limits on the number of excavations but limited to a one year time limit. Rowe abandoned his agreement.
Sometime after April 16, 1954, the said Faulk through an agent started re-excavating but was ordered off the property by appellee Booth.
In October, 1958, the said Faulk assigned his interests in the said agreement between Faulk and appellee Booth to the appellant S}dtes.
On February 26, 1959 appellant filed a complaint of Declaratory Relief in the Circuit Court of Pinellas County, Florida praying for among other things an adjudication to the rights of the parties in said agreement.
On motion for summary judgment the trial -court found for appellee in the following language:
“ * * * The Court, having examined the instrument finds that one excavation, as set out in the written instrument, dated July 11, 1949,- was abandoned and it is the finding of this Court that said instrument and various assignments are now not a lien or interest in the property described in the complaint.
“The Court further finds that the right to excavate for buried treasure would be a personal property right;
“It Is Therefore Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that the Plaintiff takes nothing and that the defendant goes hence without day.”
At the time appellant moved for summary judgment the Trial Judge had before him appellant’s complaint signed by his attorney, the agreements of July 11, 1949, May 7, 1951 and October of 1958 and an affidavit signed by appellee Booth.
*67Considering all these instruments in a light most favorable to appellant, there does not appear any facts in controversy; and it further appears that the said Faulk had abandoned his rights in the agreement dated July 11, 1949, and as a consequence thereof, appellant took nothing by the assignment dated October of 1958.
Affirmed.
KANNER, Acting Chief Judge and SHANNON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Shlomo Korach v. Anderson, 528 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…ffirmed. See and compare City National Bank of Coral Gables v. H. & B. Construction Corp., 183 So. 2d 704 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966); Dade-Commonwealth Title Insurance Company v. Biscayne Kennel Club, Inc., 143 So. 2d 713 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962); Sykes v. Booth, 119 So. 2d 66 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960).…