Eaton v. Graves
This text of 198 So. 202 (Eaton v. Graves) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
Appellant as complainant filed his bill of complaint to cancel fourteen promissory notes and for other relief. An answer was filed to certain portions of the bill of complaint which was tested by a motion to dismiss and a motion to strike as to that part seeking affirmative relief. Both motions were overruled. Testimony was taken and a final decree was entered for defendant for attorneys’ fees and for judgment on the notes. From this judgment, the present appeal was prosecuted.
It is urged here that the answer was insufficient, that some of the notes were improperly accelerated, and that the transaction' was infected with usury.
We have examined these questions and it is not shown that the chancellor committed error. We cannot see that a discussion of them would serve any useful purpose so the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
198 So. 202, 144 Fla. 569, 1940 Fla. LEXIS 1095, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/eaton-v-graves-fla-1940.