Case Name: Strouse & Brothers, a Corporation, Plaintiff in Error, v. T. C. Hall, Defendant in Error
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1911-06
Citations: 62 Fla. 394
Docket Number: 
Parties: Strouse & Brothers, a Corporation, Plaintiff in Error, v. T. C. Hall, Defendant in Error.
Judges: Whitfield, C. J., and Shackleford and Cockrell, J. J., concur;
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 62
Pages: 394–395

Head Matter:
Strouse & Brothers, a Corporation, Plaintiff in Error, v. T. C. Hall, Defendant in Error.
Where a writ of error purports to be taken to a final judgment and no such final judgment- as will support a writ of error appears in the transcript, the court should not proceed to consider the errors assigned but should dismiss the writ of error whether a motion be made for that purpose or not, since, except in case of an order granting a new trial under the statute, a writ of error may properly issue only to a judgment making a final disposition of the action in the trial court.
This case was decided by Division A.
Writ of error to the Circuit Court for Marion County.
The facts in the case are stated in the opinion of.the court.
J. W. Frasier and Wm. Hunter, for Plaintiff in Error;
H. M. Hampton, for Defendant in Error.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
— It appears from the transcript that during the trial of the cause the plaintiff announced that on account of a ruling of the court, refusing to admit certain proffered documentary evidence, it would be compelled to take a non-suit. We find nothing in the transcript which even purports to be a final judgment, therefore there is nothing to support a writ of error. See Goldring v. Reid, 60 Fla. 78, 53 South. Rep. 503, where prior decisions of this court will be found cited.
There being no- final judgment, it necessarily follows that the writ of error must be dismissed.
Whitfield, C. J., and Shackleford and Cockrell, J. J., concur;
Taylor, Hocker and Parkhill, J. J., concur in the opinion.