Case Name: Kissimmee Everglades Land Company, a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. W. J. S. Carr, et al., Appellees
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1924-12-04
Citations: 88 Fla. 387
Docket Number: 
Parties: Kissimmee Everglades Land Company, a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. W. J. S. Carr, et al., Appellees.
Judges: . Whitfield, P. J., and West and Terrell, J. J., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 88
Pages: 387–391

Head Matter:
Kissimmee Everglades Land Company, a Florida Corporation, Appellant, v. W. J. S. Carr, et al., Appellees.
Division B.
Opinion Filed December 4, 1924.
Petition for Rehearing Denied December 18, 1924.
On Rehearing.
1. While an appellant, against whom a decree pro confesso has been entered, can on appeal question the correctness 'of the final decree rendered in the cause in so far as it affects his rights, yet the correctness of the decree is tested by the case made before final decree and not by matters first presented in a petition for rehearing.
2. Where it does not appear when a final decree is rendered in foreclosure proceedings, that a party defendant whb has • purchased a part of the mortgaged property, expressly assumed as a part of the purchase price, the payment of the entire mortgage indebtedness then existing on all of the land, the court is not required to order a sale bf the portion sold to such a vendee before the other portion is sold.
3. Where a series of notes are secured by mortgage, such 11'otes, in foreclosure rroceedings in equity, will not be ordered paid in the order of their maturity if equitable considerations require a different'order of payment.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Highlands County; George W. Whitehurst, Judge.
Ellis F. Davis, for Appellant;
Leitner & Leitner, Johnston & Garrett, and Giles J. Patterson, for Appellees.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
This cause having heretofore been submitted to the Court upon the transcript of the record of the decree herein, and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the Court being now advised of its judgment to be giveii in the premises, it seems to the Court that there is no error in the said decree; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the Court that the said decree of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby, affirmed.
. Whitfield, P. J., and West and Terrell, J. J., concur.