Case Name: Lillie Sikes Worrell, Appellant, v. M. Ellen Ford, Appellee
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1925-11-19
Citations: 90 Fla. 571
Docket Number: 
Parties: Lillie Sikes Worrell, Appellant, v. M. Ellen Ford, Appellee.
Judges: West, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell and Strum, J. J., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 90
Pages: 571–576

Head Matter:
Lillie Sikes Worrell, Appellant, v. M. Ellen Ford, Appellee.
Division B.
Opinion Filed November 19, 1925.
Petition for Rehearing Denied December 19, 1925.
1. The term at which the motioi for new trial in an action at law was heard and denied, is ‘the term of the court at which the verdict was rendered or tie trial had” within the meaning of Kule 97 of Circuit Court Practice, which provides that “the hill of exceptions shall m made up and signed during the term of the court at which the verdict is rendered or trial had, unless by special order further time is allowed.
2. The general rule is that a tria', at law is not concluded,- although there be verdict and .iuüsment, until the motion for new trial where one is lawfully interposed, is disposed of.
A motion to strike tbe bill of exceptions.
Motion denied.
Judson & Hopper, for Appellant
J. 77. Hotvell, for Appellee.

Opinion:
Brown, J.
Appellee filed a motion to strike the bill of exceptions in this case, upon the ground that it was not tendered or signed during the term at which the trial was had and the verdict and judgment entered, as required by Rule 97 of Circuit Court Practice-. It appears from the record that trial was had at the fall term of Polk County Circuit Court, and verdict and judgment entered on October 31st, 1924, in favor of the plaintiff, M. Ellen Ford. Motion for new trial was filed by defendant, Worrell, with in four days. The motion for aew trial was heard and denied at the subsequent or sjring term of the court, on June 2nd, 1925, and the bill of exceptions was presented to the judge on July 27th, and signed by him on July 29th, 1925, during the same term in which the motion for new trial had been argued and denied. The latter term is the "term of the court at which che verdict was rendered or the trial had" within the meaning of Rule 97 of Circuit Court Rules, which provided that "the bill of exceptions shall be made up and signed curing the term of the court at which the verdict is rendered or trial had, unless by special order further time is allowed. ' ' The general rule is that a trial at law is not concluded until the motion for new UiaL where one is lawfully interposed, and retained for consideration, is disposed of. Greeley v. Percival, 21 Fla. 428; Rehfield v. Moore, 76 Fla. 378, 80 South. Rep. 52; Live Oak Ry. Co. v. Holmes, 85 Fla. 463; McClellan v. Wood, 78 Fla. 407, 83 So. 295; A. C. L. R. Co. v. Mallard, 53 Fla. 515, 43 So. 755.
The motion is accordingly denied.
West, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Terrell and Strum, J. J., concur.