FOWLER
v.
HAMILL
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.
Fowler, as assignee of McClosky's interest in a patent dispute, appealed a Circuit Court decree dismissing McClosky's bill of complaint against Hamill, but the Supreme Court dismissed the appeal because it was not timely filed—the application and allowance of appeal came nearly two years after the final decree of April 21, 1883, violating the requirement that appeals be taken within the prescribed time period.
© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Mr. Chief Justice Fuller delivered the opinion of the court.
Fowler, deceased, claimed as having by assignment become the owner of all the interest of one. McClosky in the subject matter of this suit, and in certain letters patent, in respect to which the bill herein was filed by McClosky against Hamill. A decree dismissing the bill was entered in the Circuit Court on April 21,1883. Judgment for costs was rendered June 16,. 1883. The record does not show the judgment of June 16, but the petition for appeal states that “ on the 21st day of April, 1883, a decree was made in said suit and duly entered, whereby it was ordered, adjudged and decreed that the said bill of complaint be dismissed, and that the said McCloskjr pay to the above-named respondent .the costs of said suit, to be taxed, and thereupon the said costs were taxed; and on the 16th day of June, 1883, the final decree was entered in said cause, including judgment for the amount of said costs as taxed, and execution was duly issued for said costs, etc.”
The application for the allowance of an appeal-was dated June 15, and the appeal allowed June 16, 1885. The citation was signed June 16 and the appeal bond executed June 17, 1885. The petition for and allowance of appeal and the citation were filed in the Circuit Court June 19, and the appeal bond June 17, 1885.
The final decree was that of April 21, 1883, and the appeal was not taken in time. Rev. Stat. § 1008; Silsby v. Foote, 20 How. 290. And had the judgment for costs of June 16, 1883, been the final decree, still the result must be the same, as the papers on appeal were not filéd in the Circuit Court within two years thereafter. Credit Co. v. Arkansas Cent. Railway Co., 128 U. S. 258. The appeal must therefore be
Dismissed„•
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (19 total)
-
Gregoria Valcin and Gerard Valcin v. Pub. Health Tr. OF Dade Cnty., 473 So. 2d 1297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)…and the results, so that not having an operative note is not acceptable medical care.” B. The general rule that the burden of proof lies where the pleadings place it, see Selma, Rome & Dalton Railroad v. United States, 139 U.S. 560, 11 S.Ct. 638, 35 L.Ed. 266 (1891), works fairly so long as the party upon which the burden of proof is [*1305] placed is in a better position to adduce the required proof. Where that is not the case, and it appears that facts essential to the matter lie “peculiarly within the…1 / 2
-
State v. Couch, 117 Fla. 609 (Fla. 1934)…t the burden of proof rests on the person who wishes to support his case or defense by a particular fact lying more peculiarly within his knowledge or of which he is supposed to be cognizant. See Selma R. & D. R. Co. v. United States, 139 U. S. 560, 35 L. Ed. 266, 11 Sup. Ct. Rep. 638. The respondent could not cast the burden upon the relator by averring that the relator did hot ask in good faith for the privilege of examining the books but that he sought merely to harrass and annoy the respondent and inter…
-
Bd. of Trade of City of Chicago v. Hammond Elevator Co., 198 U.S. 424 (U.S. 1905)
Previewing 3 of 19 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Credit Co. Ltd. v. Ark. Cent. Ry. Co., 128 U.S. 258 (U.S. 1888)
- Silsby v. Elisha Foote, 20 How. 290 (U.S. 1803)