PAUL E. CRAFT AND JERRY ELLIOTT CRAFT, APPELLANTS,
v.
ESTATE OF JAMES E. CRAFT, DECEASED, 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.
The Florida Supreme Court transferred an appeal to the District Court of Appeal because the Court lacked jurisdiction to hear a case involving alleged inherent constitutional construction, as jurisdiction cannot rest on such construction absent a direct constitutional question.
The Florida Supreme Court lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal based solely on an alleged inherent construction of a constitutional provision governing County Judge's Court jurisdiction.
[1] Jurisdiction of the Florida Supreme Court on appeal cannot rest on an alleged inherent construction of a controlling constitutional provision absent a direct constitution…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJames E. Craft created a trust as part of his will. Paul E. Craft and Jerry Elliott Craft petitioned the County Judge's Court for construction and rev…
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 County Judge's Court cases and more on FLexlaw
This cause is before this Court on appeal from a judgment of the County Judge’s Court of Palm Beach County which allegedly inherently construed Fla.Const., art. V, § 7(3), F.S.A. (repealed January 1, 1973), as to the jurisdiction of the County Judge’s Court.
The action arose before the trial court on a petition for construction and revocation of probate of a portion of the will of James E. Craft, specifically that portion dealing with a trust which Craft has created. A motion to dismiss for lack of jurisdiction was granted, and this order was appealed. It is urged that, in determining that the County Judge’s Court did not have jurisdiction over the questions involving a trust, the trial judge inherently construed Fla.Const., art. V, §7(3), F.S.A. (repealed January 1, 1973), which dealt with the jurisdiction of the now dissolved County Judges’ Courts.
*5A motion to dismiss or transfer the appeal to the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District, was denied October 19, 1972, but it is now determined that said motion should have been granted and the appeal transferred. In Ogle v. Pepin, Fla., 273 So.2d 391, filed February 21, 1973, we determined that the jurisdiction of this Court on appeal cannot rest on an alleged inherent construction of a controlling provision of the Constitution pursuant to Fla.Const., art. V, § 3(b)(1), F.S.A. Accordingly, our earlier order denying the motion to transfer is hereby revoked and annulled and said motion is now granted and the appeal is transferred to the District Court of Appeal, Fourth District.
It is so ordered.
CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.