Davis v. Modern Woodmen of America

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Davis v. Modern Woodmen of America

118 So. 2d 805, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2796

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 17, 1960

DocketNo. 59-468

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 118 So. 2d 805 (Davis v. Modern Woodmen of America) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Davis v. Modern Woodmen of America, 118 So. 2d 805, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2796 (Fla. Ct. App. 1960).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final decree in an action of interpleader. A notice of appeal was filed by one of the defendants, Raymond Andrew Davis. Defendant, Edith Maynard Davis, who.prevailed in the trial court, cross assigned as error the provision in the final decree which allowed an attorney’s fee to the plaintiff, Modern Woodmen of America. Thereafter, upon motion by Edith Maynard Davis, the appeal brought by Raymond Andrew Davis was dismissed, and it was further ordered that the cross assignment of error shall stand as an appeal to be processed by Edith Maynard Davis as by an appellant.

It is urged that the trial judge erred when he allowed the plaintiff an attorney’s fee because suit upon the contract of insurance had been brought by the cross appellant prior to the time of the filing of the bill of interpleader. The record reveáis that this case is governed by the principle relative to attorney’s fees upon bills of interpleader set forth by the Supreme Court of Florida in Drummond Title Company v. Weinroth, Fla.1955, 77 So.2d 606, 610, and Equitable Life Assurance Society of U. S., v. Nichols, Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 500, 501.

Therefore, the allowance of an attorney’s fee was erroneous.

The decree is reversed in part.

HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final decree in an action of interpleader. A notice of appeal was filed by one of the defendants, Raymond Andrew Davis. Defendant, Edith Maynard Davis, who.prevailed in the trial court, cross assigned as error the provision in the final decree which allowed an attorney’s fee to the plaintiff, Modern Woodmen of America. Thereafter, upon motion by Edith Maynard Davis, the appeal brought by Raymond Andrew Davis was dismissed, and it was further ordered that the cross assignment of error shall stand as an appeal to be processed by Edith Maynard Davis as by an appellant.

It is urged that the trial judge erred when he allowed the plaintiff an attorney’s fee because suit upon the contract of insurance had been brought by the cross appellant prior to the time of the filing of the bill of interpleader. The record reveáis that this case is governed by the principle relative to attorney’s fees upon bills of interpleader set forth by the Supreme Court of Florida in Drummond Title Company v. Weinroth, Fla.1955, 77 So.2d 606, 610, and Equitable Life Assurance Society of U. S., v. Nichols, Fla.1956, 84 So.2d 500, 501.

Therefore, the allowance of an attorney’s fee was erroneous.

The decree is reversed in part.

HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

118 So. 2d 805, 1960 Fla. App. LEXIS 2796, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/davis-v-modern-woodmen-of-america-fladistctapp-1960.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack