Indian River Manufacturing Co. v. Wooten
Supreme Court of Florida
This case was decided by Division B. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard county. Statement. On the 16th day of January, 1903, the appellant filed its bill in chancery in the Circuit Court for Brevard county against the appellees, alleging therein that appellant was seized in fee and possessed and had the right of possession of certain lands therein described, the value of which lands consisted largely of the timber growing thereon; that the cutting of the trees thereon…
Read the full summary
This case was decided by Division B. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Brevard county. Statement. On the 16th day of January, 1903, the appellant filed its bill in chancery in the Circuit Court for Brevard county against the appellees, alleging therein that appellant was seized in fee and possessed and had the right of possession of certain lands therein described, the value of which lands consisted largely of the timber growing thereon; that the cutting of the trees thereon and the removal of logs therefrom tended to impair partially, if not wholly, said value; that appellees had cut down…
1Opinion of the CourtShackleford, J.
(after stating the facts). — In view of the conclusion which we have reached, no extended statement of the pleadings or evidence is necessary. Neither is it advisable to discuss the errors assigned in detail. It is contended by appellant that Walter S. McNair, Thomas J. Wooten, Benjamin S. Brigg and Robert T. Hasleton were all necessary parties defendant to the cross-bill and that by reason of their absence as parties the decree was erroneous, and for that reason, if for no other, should be reversed. If this contention is sound and the parties above named were indispensable parties to the…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Price v. StrattonSupreme Court of Florida · 1903
- Robinson v. HoweSupreme Court of Florida · 1895
- Oliver v. CliftonSupreme Court of Arkansas · 1894
- Davis v. RogersSupreme Judicial Court of Maine · 1851
- Farmers & Mechanics' Bank v. City of DetroitMichigan Supreme Court · 1864
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by8 opinions
- Lovett and Lovett v. LovettSupreme Court of Florida · 1927
- Florida Land Rock Phosphate Co. v. AndersonSupreme Court of Florida · 1905
- Florida Dept. of Revenue v. CummingsSupreme Court of Florida · 2006
- Byrne Realty Co. v. South Florida Farms Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1921
- Sarasota Ice, Fish & Power Co. v. Lyle & Co.Supreme Court of Florida · 1907
3 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.