CURRY U-DRIVE IT, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ALVIN ROSS, TRADING AND DOING BUSINESS AS ROSS PHOTO OFFSET PRINTERS, 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.
Curry U-Drive It appealed a civil judgment against it to the Florida Supreme Court, but the court dismissed the appeal because the plaintiff lacked a proper legal remedy—an appeal may not be taken directly to the Supreme Court from a circuit court judgment rendered in a case originally appealed from a civil court of record.
An appeal may not be taken to the Supreme Court from a judgment of a circuit court rendered in a case appealed to the circuit court from a civil court of record; such cases may only be brought to the Supreme Court by common law certiorari, and only if sufficient grounds exist to invoke the Court's organic power to issue the writ.
“It is well settled that an appeal may not be taken to the Supreme Court from a judgment of a circuit court rendered in a case appealed to the circuit court from a civil court of record.”
Establishes the fundamental jurisdictional limitation that bars the plaintiff's direct appeal to the Supreme Court.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceCurry U-Drive It, Inc. brought an action against Alvin Ross in the Civil Court of Record, Dade County. Final judgment was entered in favor of Ross. Cu…
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 Common Law Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
O’CONNELL, Justice.
Appellant, Curry U-Drive It, Inc., brought an action in the Civil Court of Record, Dade County, against appellee, Alvin Ross, trading and doing business as Ross Photo Offset Printers. Final judgment was entered in favor of the defendant Ross in the civil court of record, whereupon plaintiff appealed to the circuit court which subsequently granted the defendant’s motion to dismiss the appeal. The plaintiff thereupon filed its Notice of Appeal to this Court. Defendant moves this Court to dismiss the appeal, on the ground that plaintiff failed to comply with Rule 29 of the Supreme Court, 31 F.S.A., concerning the payment of taxed costs, and with Rules 31 and 36, concerning the preparation in the brief of an appendix.
It is well settled that an appeal may not be taken to the Supreme Court from a judgment of a circuit court rendered in a case appealed to the circuit court from a civil court of record. Leslie v. Maurer Construction Co., Fla., 67 So. 2d 426. F.S.A. Sections 33.11, 33.12. Such a cause may only be brought to this Court by common law certiorari, which writ does not authorize a review of the circuit court’s judgment as on appeal, since the Constitution gave the circuit court final appellate jurisdiction in cases arising in courts inferior to it. Mutual Benefit Health & Accident Ass’n v. Bunting, 133 Fla. 646, 183 So. 321. Consequently, the plaintiff in this cause misconceived his remedy.
Nor can it be successfully contended that F.S. Section 59.45, F.S.A. may be utilized to “save” this appeal by allowing it to be regarded as a petition for certiorari. Such a contention may have prevailed had the attempted appeal shown sufficient grounds to invoke this Court’s organic power to issue the common-law writ of certiorari to review proceedings at law below. Hensley v. Palmer, Fla., 59 So. 2d 851. In the instant case there was no such showing.
Inasmuch as we feel that the appeal' should be dismissed for the reasons cited’ herein and not for those raised by the appellee, we must dismiss the appeal on our own motion.
It is so ordered.
DREW, C. J., and THOMAS and ROBERTS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hilkmeyer v. Latin Am. AIR Cargo Expediters, Inc., 94 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 1957)…8 So. 820; Brinson v. Tharin, 1930, 99 Fla. 696, 127 So. 313. This holding has been more recently confirmed in Mutual Ben [*824] efit Health & Accident Ass’n v. Bunting, 1938, 133 Fla. 646, 183 So. 321 and Curry U-Drive It, Inc., v. Ross, Fla. 1956, 89 So. 2d 796. . While we find that much has been written on the general subject we find no definitive historically based analysis of the right to trial by jury. See e. g. Federalist Nos. 81 and 83; Thayer, Preliminary Treatise on Evidence at the Common Law, Ch.…
-
Cast-Crete Corp. v. Prater, 134 So. 2d 813 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961)…r to a circuit court.” It is seen, therefore, that through neither constitutional or statutory authority does any provision exist which permits •of a second appeal. See State v. Katz, Fla.App.1959, 108 So. 2d 60; Curry U-Drive It v. Ross, Fla.1956, 89 So. 2d 796. The conclusion must be that appeal does not lie. As to defendant’s request that its notice of appeal, together with the record, be regarded as a petition for writ of certiorari in the event that is the proper remedy, this must be considered in the…
Authorities Cited
- Mut. Benefit Health & Accident Ass'n v. Bunting, 133 Fla. 646 (Fla. 1938)
- Hensley v. Palmer, 59 So.2d 851 (Fla. 1952)
- Leslie v. Maurer Const. Co., 67 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 1953)