Case Name: John D. Robertson, Appellant, v. The Silver Springs and Western Railroad Company, a corporation, Appellee
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1909-06
Citations: 58 Fla. 512
Docket Number: 
Parties: John D. Robertson, Appellant, v. The Silver Springs and Western Railroad Company, a corporation, Appellee.
Judges: Shackleford and Cockrell, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 58
Pages: 512–513

Head Matter:
John D. Robertson, Appellant, v. The Silver Springs and Western Railroad Company, a corporation, Appellee.
In a case of disputed possession of land, where, upon a consideration of the evidence, it does not appear that the finding of the master approved by the chancellor is erroneous, a decree dismissing the bill of complaint without prejudice will be affirmed, when no. errors of law appear.
This case was decided by Division A.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County.
The facts in the case are stated in the opinion of the court.
Davis & Martin, for Appellant;
H. M. Hampton, for Appellee.

Opinion:
Whitfield, C. J.
The appellant as complainant filed a bill in equity in the Circuit Court for Marion County seeking to have certain deeds cancelled as a cloud upon his title to designated lands which complainant alleged •he owned and was in possession of. A plea was filed challenging the jurisdiction of the court and denying that the complainant at the commencement of the suit was in possession of the lands. A replication was filed and testimony was taken before a master who found against the complainant. The court approved the finding and dismissed the bill of complaint "without prejudice to the right of the complainant to bring such action as he may be advised."
Upon a consideration of the testimony the decree of the court dismissing the bill of complaint without prejudice must be affirmed since the finding of the master approved by the chancellor that the defendant and not the complainant was in possession of the land when this suit was begun cannot on the evidence be held to be erroneous. , The other assignments of error are, rendered immaterial by the conclusion reached or they do not appear to be well taken upon the record brought here.
Let the decree be affirmed.
Shackleford and Cockrell, JJ., concur.
Taylor, P. J., and Parkhill, J., concur in the opinion.
Hocker, J., took no part.