WILLIAMS & REED, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
ELLEN ROWELL CHASE 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 Florida District Court of Appeal affirmed a lower court's dismissal of a creditor's bill, holding that the circuit court lacked jurisdiction to probate an estate. The court clarified that while the circuit court could not entertain the probate matter, the dismissal was without prejudice to the plaintiff filing a new, independent action within the circuit court's proper jurisdiction.
No, the circuit court did not have jurisdiction to probate an estate. The trial court was correct in dismissing the petition, and the plaintiff was not entitled to amend because the petition lacked any showing of matters within the circuit court's jurisdiction.
“This appeal is from an order dismissing plaintiff's petition with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter.”
Describes the nature of the appeal and the lower court's decision.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiff filed a petition in the circuit court, styled as a creditor's bill, but which the court found was solely an attempt to probate an estate…
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 Creditor'S Bill cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal is from an order dismissing plaintiff’s petition with prejudice for lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter. We have examined plaintiff’s petition in the light of the appellate presentment and find that plaintiff was improperly and solely seeking, in the guise of a creditor’s bill, the probate of an estate in the circuit court. Fla.Const. art. V, § 6(3), F.S.A.; Fla.Const. art. V, § 7(3); F.S. 1967, Section 36.01, F.S.A.; F.S.1967, Section 36.02, F.S.A.; F.S.1967, Section 36.16 (1), F.S.A. and F.S.1967, Section 732.01, F.S.A. Thus, the trial court decision was entirely correct.
Plaintiff also contends on appeal that it should have been permitted to amend to assert a creditor’s bill. But there was not the slightest showing in the petition of matters within the jurisdiction of the circuit court and, because of this, we cannot say that the trial court was in error. Thus, while our affirmance shall stand as a bar to plaintiff’s attempts to have the circuit court exercise the jurisdiction of the county judge s court, it is without prejudice to its right to file a new and independent action, if any it has, which may he properly cognizable in the circuit court.
Affirmed.
WALDEN, McCAIN and REED, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Williams & Reed, Inc. v. Chase, 237 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1970)…Appeals dismissed without opinion. 227 So. 2d 75.…