The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1884-07-22
EAU-NOTES To Decisions OF THE
SUPR EME COURT OF FLORIDA.

Duval county.
WALKER, Judge of Second Circuit sitting in
place ni the Chief Justice:
A Judgment entered bv the clerk in vaca-
ton ought not TO he amended when 1t appears
from the record that no judgment ought To have
been entered.
9 An execution against IN administrator
should be suspended when it does not appear on
lis face whether it is TO be satisfied out o the in
dividual property of the defendant ar out of the
property OF his interstate.
3 f. F. A. executrix of J. :. A., made note
by which she promised to pay to ii. ) H. or his
order 81 ,097, demand, with interest AT ten per
cent and signed said noie Il r. A, eXecuirIX nf
the estate of J. s. A" Held, That this was the
note of F. A., and did not bind the estate OF j.
6. A.
E. F. A, exccutrix, having died, }. ). d.
was appointed administrator de 6onts MN OF D. ,
A. and was sued as such on the above mole NO
plea, answer or demurrer having been filed, the
clerk IN vacation on the proper rule day, on no
other proof than said promissory note, entered
judgment that plaintiff "hare and recocer outcf and
from tue defcndant us administrator " d. ; Il De
ret~d, the amount of said nole and costs Here
the judgment stopped without saying out OF
whose property it was to be satisfied. Plaintiff
moved to amend the judgment " so as to have it
read and appear of record as against the goods,
&c. of j. S. A., deceased"
This motion was refused by the Circuit Judge:
He'll, That this ruling was correct, because, on
entered any Judgment either against the defcn
dant individually or az administrator OF }. 3 A.
10 be levied of the goods &c, OF the latter, and
the court ought not to amend a Judgment en-
tered by the clerk when it appears from the rec
ord that the clerk ought not to have entered any
judgment
5. The execution commanded the sheriff that
of the goods &c, of j s d. as administrator Of
tie estate Of j. s. A., deceased, you cause to be
made" the amount OF said judgment and costs
The Circuit Judge, on motion, suspended this
execution Held, That this ruling was right be-
cause every execution against an administrator
ought to he suspended, unless it clearly shows on
lis face whether it is to be satisfied out of the in
dvdual property of defendant or out OF the
property OF his intestate in his hands to he adj
ministered.
Judgment affirmed.
c. p. & J. c. Cooper, for appellant A. w.
Cockrcll, J. I. & G L. Walker, for appellee.
David Robinson, Plaintiff in Error, VS. The
State OF Florida, Defendant in Error-Leon
county.
NANNALKENBuRGH, j.:
l. The veure is necessary part of an indict
mcnt and it must be proven as laid
3 The time OF the commission OF the offence
must be proven 10 show that the prosecution Is
not barred by the statute of limitations
Judgment reversed and new trial awarded
VIM P Byrd, for plaintiff in error Attorney
| Gen eral, for the State
| franklin Cook Plaintiff in Error vs.. The State
of Florida, Defendant in Error-Orange coun-
~.
| VANEALKENBUGRH +
| l. Ii ia necessary for An indictment to state
! the county within which The offence was com
| mitted. and the proof must afirmalively sustain
such allegation.
g In IA criminal a new trial will he
| IL. a. 81.
! below tails to establish the venue laid III the
Indictment.
Judgment reversed and new trial awarded.
F. VI. Hammond for plaintiff in error; Attor-
nry General tor the State
Dubois vs.. Holmes -Duval county
! RANDALL G. j.:
In cjectment II is incumbent on the plaintiff
| claiming under deeds tn show proper c0nveyanrcs
| from II party having title or prior possession, in
| order To put "A deten liant in possession /" proof
of his right.
Judgment reversed
John T. Il G. L. Walker, for appellant; c. 2.
Il }. {. Cooper, for appellee
y. o. Insurance Association. Appellant, W.. NJ
A. Boniel, OBSERVATION-DISCLOSURES county.
| RANDALL G j.:
Plaintiff procured policy Of insurance in
! defendant association, through an employc
| of an agent, and after il expired applied
| for a renewal, bul declined 10 pay the premium
and take The renewed policy, and it was
| ccllcd. He afterwards requested The same EN-
! plOvc OF the same agent To insure his property,
and paid part Ot The premium bui did not spr
! city in what company he desired To be insured,
| the same agent being the agen, of several com
panicS, and no policy was ISSUED. After d+siruc-
! ton OF the property by fire he paid u" rmpOyc
! the balance OF the premium, but tho agent re
turned The money, declining 10 issnc policy.
! Defendant had no knowledge That the employee
had anything to do with lil'ir business. Upon
these facts the plaintiff had no contract tor insur
! ance in defendant association.
Judgment reversed and new trial awarded
w. 4. Blouni. for appellant; Mallory,
for appellee.
Philip Walter Appellant, v. the Florida Savings
Bank &c. Respondent Appeal from Duva
county.
RANDALL, C. j.:
l. When in action upon a contract the de-
PENDENT pleads that he did not promise as
alleged" and also pleads specially thar the
plaintiff contracted with him rs An agent of an
other and not otherwise, and that plaintiff knew
this fact at the time of contracting such special
plea is only a repetition OF the general plea that
the defendant did not promise ~ alleged.
2. The overriding of plaintiffs demurrer TO
such special pleas may therefore have been errO-
ncOus buI such ruling did no, change the issues
or affect the legal rights of the parties. Such
pleas only encountered the record.
3 Where upon the trial of such cause a verdict
is found for the defendant but upon appeal the
record does not show the testimony nor the
rulings of the court thereon, nor the charge Of
the court to the jury, nor any exceptions, this
court cannot reverse the judgment on account of
the everything Of the demurrer io the pleas, il
does not appear whether the court admitted i'm
proper testimony in behalf of defendant nor in.
deed that the plaintiff introduced any testimony
in the case 10 support the declaration.
Judgment affirmed
A. W. Cockrell, j. T. & c. u Walker, for
Appellant; r. B. Archibald, for Appellee.
Judson Dickson, Plaintiff in Error, vs. the State
Of Florida, Defendant in Error-Madison |
county
NEUTRALITY-SUSPICIOUS. j.:
l. A States Attorney has no authority to |
amen an indictment found by grand jury by |
hls individual endorsement thereon. The only |
legal manner in which an amendment can be |
made is provided for in Chapter 1907, Laws
$780,
g. The allegation of the time or date of the
commission Of the offence is OF substance
and not of form A mistake in snch allegation
is not susceptible of amendment.
3. The defendant was Indicted in April, 1884
the offence was charged to have been committed
in December, 1884; the States Attorney
dOrsed upon the indictment over his signature
these words; The date upon which thu State
relies is the tenth day of December, A. d. 1888
and not the tenth day of December. A. d. 1884"