EMMA L. NELSON, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
DANIEL B. MCLAURIN, DEFENDANT IN ERROR
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.
A plaintiff sued on a money bond, but the trial court failed to resolve the defendant's demurrers before submitting the case to a jury, and allowed a verdict and judgment against the plaintiff without the plaintiff being present or represented. The Florida Supreme Court reversed, holding that demurrers must be disposed of before a jury is sworn and that a case cannot proceed to verdict in the plaintiff's absence.
The trial court erred by failing to dispose of the demurrers before submitting the case to a jury and by allowing a verdict and judgment against the plaintiff in the plaintiff's absence without representation. Demurrers raising issues of law must be resolved before a jury is sworn, and cases cannot properly proceed to verdict when the plaintiff is absent.
“The Circuit Court erred in not disposing of the demurrers-before swearing a jury to try the issues, if any there were,, in order that if the demurrers had been deemed insufficient.,an issue might have been made up upon the matters pleaded.”
Establishes the fundamental procedural error that demurrers must be resolved before jury submission.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEmma Nelson sued Daniel McLaurin on a money bond. McLaurin demurred to the declaration and filed special pleas, which Nelson demurred to in turn. Addi…
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 Issue of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
delivered the opinion of the court.
The plaintiff in error sued defendant in debt upon a money bond. The defendant demurred to the declaration for special causes, and on the same day filed special pleas.
The plaintiff demurred to the special pleas. Defendant afterwards filed additional special pleas, to which the plain*46tiff demurred. Afterwards, as appears by the record, the-cause was submitted to a jury who found for the defendant,., and. judgment was rendered by the court - against the plaintiff for costs.
The record of the judgment does not show that the plaintiff was present in person or by attorney, at the time the cause was tried before the jury, but on the contrary, it is-apparent from the proceedings had subsequently that1 the-plaintiff was not represented.
It does not appear that the several issues of law raised by the several demurrers or either of them were disposed of by the court, and we cannot discover that any issue of fact was joined subsequent to the demurrers. The cause was, therefore, not at issue upon the facts, and the issues of law only were before the court.
The Circuit Court erred in not disposing of the demurrers-before swearing a jury to try the issues, if any there were,, in order that if the demurrers had been deemed insufficient.,an issue might have been made up upon the matters pleaded. (2 Mumford, 518; 6 Fla., 316.) And besides* if the plaintiff" did not appear at the time the cause was reached, it was: improper to submit the case to a jury, (even if an issue of fact was joined which might be tried by a jury,) in the absence of the plaintiff or his attorney and in the absence of his proofs, and thus obtain a verdict and enter a judgment which might be a bar to a future suit. In such case the defendant should have moved for a non-suit or dismissal of the suit.
The judgment of the Circuit Court is reversed with costs....
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
H. D. Forbes & Bro. v. Porter, 25 Fla. 362 (Fla. 1889)
-
Fla. Ry. & Navigation Co. v. Rhodes, 23 Fla. 309 (Fla. 1887)