Coggins v. Mimms
Opinion
Floyd R. COGGINS and Maxlyn Coggins, His Wife, Appellants,
v.
Walter F. MIMMS and Gene C. Mimms, His Wife, et al., Appellees.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.
*965 John Roscow, III, of Scruggs, Carmichael, Long, Tomlinson, Roscow, Prigdeon, Helpling & Young, Gainesville, for appellants.
Nancy Y. Selfridge and Jonathan F. Wershow, of Wershow, Burwell & Wershow, Gainesville, for appellees Mimms.
Pierce J. Guard, Jr., Lakeland, for appellees Stones.
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Judge.
Appellant Floyd Coggins' recorded affidavit, reciting the existence of agreements by others to convey to him the land here contested, was not an instrument entitled to recordation as constructive notice to other potential buyers because the instrument contained no sworn acknowledgment of the vendors. Section 696.01, Florida Statutes (1977). Recordation of the Coggins affidavit, indexed by the clerk under his name alone, therefore was not notice to appellees of a prior obligation of the vendors to sell to Coggins. The circuit court's summary judgment is
AFFIRMED.
MILLS, C.J., and SHIVERS, J., concur.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
373 So. 2d 964 (Coggins v. Mimms) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.