WILLIE BRYANT, APPELLANT,
v.
EVANS SMALL, APPELLEE
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.
Bryant sought to rescind a warranty deed his deceased mother executed to Small, arguing it was procured through undue influence. The circuit court applied res judicata based on a prior probate court determination, but the appellate court reversed, holding that the county judge's probate court lacked jurisdiction to decide the deed's validity as a purely equitable matter.
The circuit court erred in applying res judicata because the county judge's probate court lacked jurisdiction to decide the validity of the deed in a purely equitable action. Res judicata does not apply where the prior judgment was entered without complying with jurisdictional requirements, as such a judgment is void.
[1] A county judge's court, sitting as a court of probate, lacks jurisdiction to decide the validity of a deed in a purely equitable action.
[2] The doctrine of res judicata is not applicable where a prior judgment was entered without complying with jurisdictional requirements, rendering the judgment void.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The county judges' courts are tribunals of limited jurisdiction, lacking jurisdiction in purely equitable actions.”
Establishes that probate courts cannot decide equitable claims regarding deed validity
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEmma Ross executed a warranty deed to Evans Small on January 2, 1969, and a will naming Small as sole beneficiary on January 3, 1969. In March 1969, B…
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 Equitable Action cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant-plaintiff Willie Bryant seeks review of an order of the Circuit Court of Dade County dated May 27, 1971, which was entered upon appellee-defendant Evans Small’s motion to limit issues. The order, in pertinent part, states as follows :
“The Court finds that said Final Order in said Ross Estate, to which no Petition for Rehearing was sought nor appeal taken therefrom has become res ju-dicata of all issues at bar save damages due defendant upon his counterclaim. This is so primarily because essential mediate and ultimate facts, necessarily involved in full trial before JUDGE PRIMM, by the same parties and same counsel, have been specifically adjudicated by an Order now Final.”
We reverse.
The instant order was entered in Bryant’s action for rescission and cancellation of a warranty deed purportedly given by his mother Emma Ross to Small, her close personal friend. The complaint prayed for equitable relief. This is the third appearance of this action before this court, Bryant v. Small, Fla.App.1970, 236 So.2d 150, which reversed a summary judgment and Bryant v. Small, Fla.App. 1971, 243 So.2d 478, quashing an interlocutory appeal.
On January 2, 1969, Emma Ross, now deceased, executed a warranty deed conveying realty in Dade County to Small, which was recorded on January 3, 1969. On January 3, 1969, she executed a will naming Small as sole beneficiary.
In March, 1969, Bryant in the County Judge’s Court sought to revoke the January 3, 1969 will on various grounds but the court did not revoke the will. Small states, and we so assume, that Bryant also sought to cancel the deed in the probate court proceeding.
In May, 1969, Bryant brought in the Circuit Court the instant suit to cancel the deed. After proceedings therein, a summary judgment for Small was entered. This court reversed. After proceedings on remand, the circuit judge entered the order appealed.
We express the view that the county judge’s court sitting as a court of probate lacked jurisdiction to decide the matter of the validity of the deed. Cf. Art. V § 7(3) with Art. V § 6(3), 1968 Constitution of the State of Florida, F.S.A. The county judges’ courts are tribunals of limited jurisdiction, lacking jurisdiction in purely equitable actions. E. g. In re Brown’s Estate, Fla.App.1961, 134 So.2d 290. The doctrine of res judicata is not' applicable where the judgment plead was entered without complying with jurisdictional requirements because for that reason the judgment is void. Florida Nat. Bank of Jacksonville v. Kassewitz, 156 Fla. 761, 25 So.2d 271. Cf. Pitts v. Pitts, 120 Fla. 363, 162 So. 708. See also: Culloden v. Music, Fla.App.1969, 226 So.2d 240 and *461cases cited. Therefore we hold that the circuit court erred in ruling that the validity of the deed was res judicata because of the final order rendered in In re Estate of Ross, Deceased (No. 82428) by the county judge.
Therefore, for the reasons stated and upon the authorities cited we reverse and remand the cause for further proceedings consistent with the view expressed herein.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Exp. Tobacco Co., Inc. v. Dep't OF Revenue & Gerald Lewis, 510 So. 2d 936 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…king jurisdiction. A judicial or quasi-judicial decision will not be given res judicata effect where rendered by a tribunal lacking subject matter jurisdiction. Florida National Bank v. Kassewitz, 156 Fla. 761, 25 So. 2d 271 (1946); Bryant v. Small, 258 So. 2d 459 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert, denied, 265 So. 2d 51 (Fla.1972). Subject matter jurisdiction can not be created by waiver, acquiescence or agreement of the parties, or by error or inadvertence of the parties or their counsel, or by the exercise of power by th…
-
Bryant v. Evans Small, 271 So. 2d 808 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)…refused by the court presented matter which would have been appropriate to include in the original complaint, and which had bearing on the merits of the cause and the relief sought. On an earlier appeal in this case (Bryant v. Small, Fla.App.1972, 258 So. 2d 459), we reviewed an order which limited the issues relating to validity of the deed, by excluding claims of fraud and undue influence because such contentions had been rejected in the probate court when previously asserted there in an effort to revoke…
-
Evans Small v. Bryant, 265 So. 2d 51 (Fla. 1972)…Certiorari denied. 258 So. 2d 459. ROBERTS, C. J., and BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur. ADKINS, J., dissents.…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pitts v. Pitts, 120 Fla. 363 (Fla. 1935)
- THE Fla. Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville v. Kassewitz, 156 Fla. 761 (Fla. 1945)
- Turgeon v. Turgeon, 134 So. 2d 290 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961)
- Poland v. City OF Pahokee, 157 Fla. 179 (Fla. 1946)
- Culloden v. Amos Music, 226 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969)
- Harper v. State, 236 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 1st DCA 1970)
- Bryant v. Evans Small, 236 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970)
- Cory v. Greyhound Lines, Inc., 243 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 4th DCA 1970)
- Fisher v. Motors Ins. Corp., 243 So. 2d 478 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)