Case Name: W. E. Smith, Appellant, v. Edith Gertrude Tydings, and H. D. Stokes as Trustee, Appellees
Court: Florida Supreme Court
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1930-12-09
Citations: 100 Fla. 1414
Docket Number: 
Parties: W. E. Smith, Appellant, v. Edith Gertrude Tydings, and H. D. Stokes as Trustee, Appellees.
Judges: Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur.
Reporter: Florida Reports
Volume: 100
Pages: 1414–1415

Head Matter:
W. E. Smith, Appellant, v. Edith Gertrude Tydings, and H. D. Stokes as Trustee, Appellees.
Division B.
Opinion filed December 9, 1930.
Hampton & Greene, for Appellant;
Anderson & Anderson, for Appellees.

Opinion:
Per Curiam.
The appellant filed bill of complaint in the Circuit Court of Marion County claiming a lien on certain property of the appellee Tydings in the hands of Stokes as Trustee, and also upon certain real estate, which lien was claimed for his services as an attorney in a suit which he had heretofore prosecuted in the Circuit Court and the Supreme Court on behalf of the appellee, in which suit final settlement was made between the parties before the final decree as to their respective rights therein, and which suit was dismissed upon stipulation and agreement between the parties before final decree.
A demurrer to the bill of complaint was sustained.
The allegations of the bill of complaint are insufficient to establish the existence of a lien in favor of the complainant in the court below against the defendant in the court below.
The bill of complaint shows upon its face that the complainant had a complete and adequate remedy at law and the bill .was without equity.
The judgment should be affirmed and it is so ordered.
Affirmed.
Whitfield, P. J., and Strum and Buford, J. J., concur.
Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J. concur in the opinion and judgment.