DOROTHY EVANS, A WIDOW,
v.
CARL GREEN, JULIA GREEN AND PATRICIAN HOTEL COMPANY
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 Supreme Court denied a motion for judgment of reversal based on a confession of errors because the confession was not endorsed by the appellant. The court indicated it would grant the motion if the appellant endorsed the confession within ten days.
No, the Florida Supreme Court denied the motion for judgment of reversal because the confession of errors was not endorsed by the appellant. The court stated it would grant the motion if the appellant endorsed the confession within ten days.
“The appellees, through counsel, have filed here confession of errors but such confession of errors has not been endorsed by the appellant and there is no proof of notice to the appellants of the confession of errors.”
This quote states the core factual issue preventing the immediate reversal.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellees filed a confession of errors in the Florida Supreme Court, seeking a reversal of the lower court's decision. However, this confession wa…
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.
The appellees, through counsel, have filed here confession of errors but such confession of errors has not been endorsed by the appellant and there is no proof of notice to the appellants of the confession of errors.
The case may be reversed in this Court without opinion as to the extent of error when the appellee files a confession of errors endorsed by the appellant consenting that an order of reversal be entered. See Gulf Power Co. v. Illinois-Florida Land Co., et al., 100 Fla. 1594, 132 Sou. 109; Clark v. Caldwell, 95 Fla. 754, 115 Sou. 632; Cameron v. Baker, Bieb & Schaub Motors, Inc., 96 Fla. 389, 118 Sou. 423.
So the motion for judgment of reversal on confession of errors will be denied, unless the appellee within ten days file in this Court endorsement and approval of reversal signed by solicitors for the appellant.
It-is so ordered.
Terrell, C. J., and Buford and Thomas, J. J., concur.
Whitfield, J., concurs in opinion and judgment.
Justices Brown and Chapman not participating as authorized by Section 4687, Compiled General Laws of 1927, and Rule 21-A of the Rules of this Court.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Indian Harbor Ests., Inc. v. Wagner, 148 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963)…erning such cases. Clark v. Caldwell, 95 Fla. 754, 116 So. 632 (1928), Cameron v. Baker, Gieb & Schaub Motors, Inc., 96 Fla. 389, 118 So. 423 (1928), Gulf Power Co. v. Illinois-Florida Land Co., 100 Fla. 1594, 132 So. 109 (1931), and Evans v. Green, 138 Fla. 284, 189 So. 232 (1939). Ordered and decreed accordingly. CARROLL, DONALD K., C. J., and STURGIS and RAWLS, JL, concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Mendes v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. (Fla. 2d DCA 2025)
- Clark v. Millard F. Caldwell, 95 Fla. 754 (Fla. 1928)
- Cameron v. Baker, 96 Fla. 389 (Fla. 1928)
- Gulf Power Co. v. Illinois-Florida Land Co., 100 Fla. 1594 (Fla. 1931)