Ropes v. Goldman
Supreme Court of Florida
This case was decided by Division B. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County. STATEMENT. E. E. Ropes, the appellant, on the 28th of August, 1905, filed in the Circuit Court of Volusia County in chancery what purports to be a bill in chancery the introductory part of which is as follows: “To the Honorable Minor S. Jones, Judge of said Court: E. E. Ropes, of the County of Yolusia and State of Florida, complainant, says: That on 2nd of March, 1900, William McCabe of…
Read the full summary
This case was decided by Division B. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Volusia County. STATEMENT. E. E. Ropes, the appellant, on the 28th of August, 1905, filed in the Circuit Court of Volusia County in chancery what purports to be a bill in chancery the introductory part of which is as follows: “To the Honorable Minor S. Jones, Judge of said Court: E. E. Ropes, of the County of Yolusia and State of Florida, complainant, says: That on 2nd of March, 1900, William McCabe of the city of Toronto, Canada, filed a bill in chancery against him to set aside a deed made to him by the Sheriff of the…
1Opinion of the CourtHocker, J.
(after stating the facts) : The assignments of error are based on the decree sustaining the demurrer and discussing the bill. The bill is exceedingly informal, having no introductory clause naming the defendants and stating its character. The appellees insist that it was intended as a bill of review, and argue it from that standpoint. The appellant contends that it is not a bill of review, but a bill to remove a cloud from his legal title to the lands described in it. The bill attacks the decree which is claimed to be a cloud on his title on two grounds. The first ground is that the…
2Cases cited2 opinions
- Sloan v. SloanSupreme Court of Florida · 1889
- Clem v. MeseroleSupreme Court of Florida · 1902