PAN AMERICAN SURETY COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
M. O. COOKE, D/B/A WAGONTOWN 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 appellate court affirmed the lower court's decision that interpleader was improper but reversed the portion that adjudicated the parties' rights, remanding for dismissal of the complaint.
Yes, the trial court was correct in finding interpleader improper. No, the trial court did not have the authority to adjudicate the rights of the parties after finding interpleader improper.
“The court, by its final decree, found that the plaintiff was not entitled to interpleader upon the ground that plaintiff did not show that the adverse claims were dependent or had a common origin.”
Establishes the trial court's finding that interpleader was improper.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePan American Surety Company filed an interpleader action, alleging M. O. Cooke and Morris Motors, Inc. were competing claimants to a fund held by Pan …
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 Adjudication Of Rights cases and more on FLexlaw
The Pan American Surety Company was plaintiff in an action of interpleader. M. O. Cooke and Morris Motors, Inc. were alleged to be contending claimants to a fund in the possession of Pan American Surety Company. The court, by its final decree, found that the plaintiff was not entitled to interpleader upon the ground that plaintiff did not show that the adverse claims were dependent or had a common origin. Having so determined the court made certain orders relative to the claims involved. It is from this final decree that this appeal is taken by Pan American Surety Company.
Upon the trial court’s finding that inter-pleader was not proper under the facts set forth in the complaint, we are in entire accord. See Paul v. Harold Davis, Inc., 155 Fla. 538, 20 So.2d 795; Miller v. Kokanour, 155 Fla. 543, 20 So.2d 797. Having determined that interpleader did not lie, the court had no authority to then ad*291judicate the rights of the parties. Drummond Title Company v. Weinroth, Fla.1955, 77 So.2d 606. Therefore the final decree appealed is affirmed insofar as it held inter-pleader was improper and is reversed as to that portion which purported to adjudicate the rights of the parties, and the cause is remanded for the entry of an amended final decree dismissing the complaint.
Affirmed in part and reversed in part and remanded.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Trak Microwave Corp. v. Medaris Mgmt., Inc., 236 So. 2d 189 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)…der action it had no alternative but to also dismiss the counterclaims without prejudice. It is this portion of the point that is important with this view and result being reflected in these cases. Pan American Surety Company v. Cooke, Fla.App.1961, 130 So. 2d 290; Aquilina v. Mangus, Fla.App.1969, 223 So. 2d 786. The trial court ruled that the plaintiff Trak (here the appellant) “has shown no right to any relief under its Bill of Inter-pleader.” It was further ordered “That the Bill of Interpleader of the P…1 / 2
-
Aquilina v. Mangus, 223 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…not lie, the court had no authority to then consider the counter-claim. Drummond Title Company v. Weinroth, Fla.1955, 77 So. 2d 606; Hollopeter and Post v. Saenz, 133 Fla. 279, 182 So. 906 (1938); Pan American Surety Company v. Cooke, Fla.App.1961, 130 So. 2d 290. Therefore, the order appealed is reversed without prejudice to the rights of the defendants, Salzer and Ratner Realty Corp., to pursue such other remedies to which they may be entitled under the law. Reversed.…
Authorities Cited
- Paul v. Harold Davis, Inc., 155 Fla. 538 (Fla. 1945)
- Drummond Title Co. v. Isreal S. Weinroth, 77 So. 2d 606 (Fla. 1955)
- Miller v. Kokanour, 155 Fla. 543 (Fla. 1945)