Mitchell v. Cotten
Supreme Court of Florida
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING. [After the decision of the foregoing case of Mitchell vs. Cotten, and on the last day of the term of the Court, the counsel for appellee filed a petition for a rehearing in said cause, assigning therefor, in substance, the following reasons :] 1st. That the Court erred in deciding that the matters and things and defence set up in the sixth plea did not constitute a bar to the plaintiff’s right of recovery: 1st. Because at the first trial of said…
Read the full summary
ON PETITION FOR REHEARING. [After the decision of the foregoing case of Mitchell vs. Cotten, and on the last day of the term of the Court, the counsel for appellee filed a petition for a rehearing in said cause, assigning therefor, in substance, the following reasons :] 1st. That the Court erred in deciding that the matters and things and defence set up in the sixth plea did not constitute a bar to the plaintiff’s right of recovery: 1st. Because at the first trial of said cause, the said sixth plea was demurred to — the demurrer was overruled by the judgment of the Court, and afterwards the…
1Opinion of the Court
LANCASTER, J,
In the matter of the petition for a rehearing in the case of Isaac W. Mitchell vs. Frederick R. Cotten, executor, filed on this the last day of the term, we have to regret that time is not afforded to the Court to deliberate and examine authorities, as the subject from its importance would induce us to desire to do; but the remembrance that the sum in controversy is very considerable — that, as it stands, the plaintiff can recover no interest, until he recovers judgment, and that the delay of a year will subject him to considerable loss, in the use of the sum in controversy, we…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- Mitchell v. CottenSupreme Court of Florida · 1848
3Cited by1 opinion
- Bailey v. ClarkSupreme Court of Florida · 1855