The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1884-12-16

sltion cannot be examined on appeal unless the
deposition is brought up by bill OF exceptions so
! that this court can examine u.
T. Where in suit against two partners as joint
debtors, a final Judgment is taken by plaintiff
against one of them after default, and upon an
issue 'ined by plea in bar by the other u verdict
is had against plaintiff the plaintiff cannot have
a new trial as against the defendant who has
pleaded. because in such Case he can have but
one judgment within The same jurisdiction fer
the same cause of action in one suit.
Judgment affirmed.
I Richard Fl. Fries, for Appellant; John c.
Avery, for Respondent.
1. 5. Coogler, App ,ilant, VS.. Anderson Mayo, Ad-
ministrator, Observation-Disclosures county.
RANDALL, C. j.:
l. bill by II creditor file for the purpose OF
subjecting lands TO levy and sale on execution.
it being alleged that the debtor had good legal
title by deed and by adverse possession but that
the title deed had been lost and the record there
OF destroyed by fire, against a grantee Of the
heirs OF former owner, who claims title, shows
no ground OF equity Jurisdiction, IS the whole
matter is cognizable in court of law.
! 2 Without some supervenins equity court of
chancery has no jurisdiction to try mere ques
! ton of legal title.
! Decree reversed, and bill to be dismissed.
Geo. p. Raney and T. S. Coogler, for Appel
liant; Wall & Sparkman, for Respondent.
Epping Bellas s. Co., Plaintiffs in Error, vs. Geo
w. Robinson, Deniendant in Error-Escambia
county.
/ RANDALL, G. j.:
| l. The county court has general and exclusive
jurisdiction, by the statute, to grant letters OF
administration upon the estates OF deceased
persons. The order granting letters is the exer-
else of iurisdic iOn, involving the ADJUDICATION
| nf n AL fANfS i'm "a N hp
attacked collaterally by proof alsunde the record
to dsprove the jurisdictiSnal facts already adju-
dicAted by the county court.
g But the county court is not court of gen.
eral Jurisdiction in the course OF the common
! law, and the rule of presamptions as to jurisdic
ton not appearing OF record, is not applicable to
this court. Its jurisdiction should appear by its
records, and when its records and proceedings do
not disclose jurisdiction in . particular case,
they may be attacked in any collateral proceed
ing by showing the absence Ofjursdiction.
3. Yet there are two exceptions to the rule
that the order and judgment of the county court
cannot be impeached coaterally by proof outside
the record, to wit: the tact that the supposed
intestate is not dead, and the fact that letters
have already been lawfully granted in the state
and not revoked. In such cases jurisdiction is
impossible.
4. The provisions of the statute that foreign
administrators may bring suits in this state, and
that special letters of ad ninistratien may be OBJ
tanned by one specially authorized by k'reign
representatives. for the collection OF debts due
the deceased, are not exclusive of the power to
grant letters generally within the state in cases
provided by law.
5. The term goods" embraces bills, nstes and
chooses in action wherein money is due, where
that word is used iu the statute relating to the
granting of letters 0t administration in this state
state possessed OF goods and chattels' in this
state Such evidences Of debt are assets Of Is
tates
g. A plea that letters of administration were
improperly granted and void because deceased
lett goods chattels or lands in this state, de-
ceased having died out of the state and that the
county court was without jurisdiction to grant
letters as appeared upon tie faos Of the records Of
tho county court granting the letters is = good
plea that the letters are void.
z. A plea in such use simply alleging the ab-
sence ot Certain jurisdiconal lxcts bot not aver
ring that the county court has not adjudicated
upon these facts he granting of the letters being
prim0 facse evidence that the court had - sdju-
dicated) is not good plea that the letters were
void. The judgment of the county court grant
ing the letters Is generally conclusive rs to al
matters properly before it. including jursdictionl
al facts. until reversed o. Get aside by direct
proceedings, with the exceptions befo'e stated,
and the facts so adjudicated cannot be re-exam-
ined collateraliy.
Reversed with directions &c.
John A. Henderson, for Plaintiffs in Error E.
A. Perry, for Defendant In EFrer.
e. C. Maxwell. and her husband W r. w. Ar.
new et al-MaFion county.
RANDALL. g. J.:
4 1. A iury having determined the question q
versci,y q between two equally competeni
witnesses who contrAdict each ether, tho cOurt
on aDpeaI viii not interfere.
4 q Acerti6cate Of deposit by he terms whefecl