DADE AIR CONDITIONING AND HEATING CORP., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
JOSEPH R. JANNACH AND ARMAJEAN JANNACH, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 1969-01-21
No. 68-399
Before CHARLES CARROLL, C. J., and PEARSON and SWANN, JJ.
218 So. 2d 193 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1969) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.


Holding

The court held that even if submitting an equity action to a jury was error, it was not reversible error given the parties' consent and the specific facts.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiffs sued to foreclose a mechanics lien and demanded a jury trial. The trial court proceeded with a jury trial, and the defendants later moved t…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

*194PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs below appeal from a final judgment for the defendants rendered on a jury verdict in a suit to foreclose a mechanics lien.

Their first point is directed to. the submission of “the entire case” to the jury thereby making the jury the ultimate finders of fact in an equity action.

The record shows that the plaintiffs filed a demand for a trial by jury and on November 22, 1967, an order was entered setting the cause for a jury trial. The cause was called for trial on February 13, 1968, and immediately prior to voir dire the judge and counsel for the parties had a discussion concerning the propriety of proceeding with a trial by jury. No specific objection to the procedure proposed by the judge was raised and the attorney for the defendants seemed to have consented to the rulings of the trial judge concerning the proper procedure to be followed. After the jury trial had commenced, the defendants filed a written motion to strike the plaintiffs’ request for a trial by jury.

Generally, irregularities in chancery practice which have been committed •with the consent of the defendant are not available to reverse a final decree against ihim. Lovett v. Lovett, 93 Fla. 611, 112 So. 768 (1927). Even assuming error argu-endo, (see Lincoln Tower Corp. v. Dunhall’s-Florida, Fla. 1952, 61 So.2d 474), we do not find reversible error under the facts and circumstances of the instant case. See Fla.Stat. § 54.23, F.S.A.; Hightower v. Bigoney, Fla. 1963, 156 So.2d 501, 17 A.L.R.3d 1308; 20 Fla.Jur. Jury § 15.

We have considered the other points for reversal raised by the plaintiffs but after consideration of the record on appeal and the briefs have found them to be without merit.

The final judgment is, therefore,

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …ving acquiesced in these procedures, the appellant cannot now challenge the trial court’s authority to determine these issues. State Road Department v. Lewis, 190 So. 2d 598 (Fla. 1st D.C.A. 1966); Dade Air Conditioning and Heating Corp. v. Jannach, 218 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3rd D.C.A. 1969); Holmes v. School Board of Orange County, 301 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 4th D.C.A. 1974). The other points raised by the appellant, by its appeals from orders awarding interest and attorney fees, we find to be without merit. See: Teate…
  • Ashley v. Ocean ROC Motel, Inc., 518 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
    …407 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). It is also axiomatic that a party to an appeal may lose its right to attach error by having agreed or consented to the ruling of procedure to which he now objects. Dade Air Conditioning & Heating Corp. v. Jannach, 218 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). The Ashleys failed to object to the instructions during conference and showed no prejudice to have resulted from the court’s refusal to give the two instructions cited as error, nor did they assign any error to the jury verdict.…
  • Est. OF Jeanne Moffitt v. Moffitt, 565 So. 2d 836 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990)
    …PER CURIAM. We reverse and remand with directions that the judgment entered on the jury’s verdict be reinstated. See Dade Air Conditioning & Heating Corp. v. Jannach, 218 So. 2d 193 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969). ANSTEAD and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., and KAHN, MARTIN D., Associate 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 intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw