MISSOURI ALDERMAN
v.
CITY OF NEW SMYRNA BEACH, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION
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 court dismissed an appeal because it was taken from an interlocutory order after a final decree had been issued, rather than from the final decree itself. This procedural error meant the appellate court could not review the entire cause.
Yes, such an appeal should be dismissed because it fails to bring the entire cause before the appellate court for review after final adjudication.
“Where an appeal is taken from an interlocutory order after a final decree has been rendered in the cause, and no appeal is taken from the final decree, the appellate court will dismiss the appeal taken solely from the interlocutory order.”
This quote establishes the rule for dismissing appeals taken from interlocutory orders after a final decree.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant appealed an order directing the issuance of a writ of assistance, which was based on a final decree previously rendered. The appeal was …
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 Writ Of Assistance cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is before the Court on an appeal from an order made by Honorable H. B. Frederick, a *75Judge of the Circuit Court of Volusia County, Florida, dated February 12, 1938, directing the issuance of a writ of assistance by the Clerk of said Court for the possession of certain lands therein described. An examination of the record shows that the final decree upon which the writ of assistance is based is dated November 1, 1937, each of which weix duly recorded in the office of the Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Volusia County, Florida.
Counsel for appellee' has filed in this Court a motion to dismiss the appeal and in support thereof cites the case of Wiley v. Hoggson, 89 Fla. 446, text 452, 105 So. 126, where it was said:
“Where an appeal is taken from an interlocutory order after a final decree has been rendered in the cause, and no appeal is taken from the final decree, the appellate court will dismiss the appeal taken solely from the interlocutory order. Oneida Land Co. v. Richards, 72 Fla. 116, 72 South. Rep. 646. This is done not because of want of jurisdiction in the appellate court, but because non constat the error if any in the interlocutory order appealed from had been cured or rendered immaterial by the final decree rendered before the appeal from the interlocutory order was taken, and because the appelJant is at fault in bringing to the appellate court only a portion of the cause by an appeal taken after the whole cause had already been adjudicated and disposed of by final decree.”
We are at a loss to understand why the appeal was not taken from the final decree so as to permit this court to review the entire cause in its effort to do substantial justice. It appears that the motion to dismiss the appeal is supported by previous decisions of this Court and well taken. The motion to dismiss the appeal is hereby granted.
Whitfield, P. J., and Brown, J., concur.
*76Ellis, C. J., and Terrell and Buford, J. J., concur in . the opinion and judgment.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Meeky Cottrell v. Amerkan, 160 Fla. 390 (Fla. 1948)…7, 168 So. 2, was an appeal from an order striking the answers of defendants. The appeal was. taken after the entry of a final decree and was dismissed upon, the authority of each of the foregoing cases. Alderman v. City of New Smyrna, 132 Fla. 74, 180 So. 516, was an appeal from an order directing the issuance of a writ of assistance after the entry by final decree and the appeal was dismissed upon the authority of Willey v. Hoggson, supra. It is one thing to dismiss a plaintiff’s appeal of an interlocu…
-
Garvin v. Jerome, 767 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 2000)…us”). Here, while the statute creates a framework for the recall process, by its silence on this particular point, it has left to judicial interpretation the details of implementation in cases such as this one. Cf. Adams v. Adams, 131 Fla. 777, 780, 180 So. 516, 518 (1938) (observing, in a lawsuit involving a challenge, as invalid for uncertainty, to a statute which attempted "to set out in detail a scheme for the levy, assessment, and collection of delinquent city taxes” that, while the Court could not "c…
Authorities Cited
- Willey v. W. J. Hoggson Corp., 89 Fla. 446 (Fla. 1925)
- Shuron Hester v. State, 312 So. 3d 173 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)
- Oneida Land Co. v. Richards, 72 Fla. 116 (Fla. 1916)