Farmers Bank & Trust Co. v. Power

107 So. 185, 90 Fla. 867
CourtSupreme Court of Florida
DecidedDecember 19, 1925
StatusPublished

This text of 107 So. 185 (Farmers Bank & Trust Co. v. Power) 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.

Bluebook
Farmers Bank & Trust Co. v. Power, 107 So. 185, 90 Fla. 867 (Fla. 1925).

Opinion

Whitfield, J.

A motion is made to dismiss the Writ of Error herein which was issued by the Clerk of the Circuit Court (Sec. 2908, Rev. Gen. Stats., 1920) on grounds (1) that it is not tested in the name of the Chief Justice of this Court; (2) that the writ when issued bore date March 28, 1925, and made returnable August 20, 1925, more than ninety days from the date of the writ; (3) that the writ and the record thereof have been materially altered in that the word “March” in the attest clause lias been erased and the word “May” written in lien thereof both in the writ and in the record thereof; (4) that the writ and the record thereof are severally false, forged and counterfeit.

The statutes provide: “All Writs of Error shall be tested in the name of the Chief Justice of the Supreme 'Court and shall issue on demand as matter of right, from the office of the Clerk of the Appellate Court or from that of the Clerk of the Court (or if there be no Clerk, from the office of the Judge) in which the' judgment has been rendered, and shall be returnable to a day, either in term time or vacation more than thirty days and not more than ninety days from the date of the writ.” See 2908, Rev. Gen. Stats., 1920.

“All Writs of Error from the Circuit Court to the Supreme Court in civil causes shall be recorded by the Clerk of the Circuit Court to whom such Writ of Error is addressed in the minute book of his Court within ten days after its issuance or receipt by him, and such record *869 ing by the Clerk of the Writ of Error shall be deemed, taken and held to be sufficient notice to the defendant in error of the pendency of such Writ of Error proceeding' in the Supreme Court, and the Supreme Court shall thereby acquire complete jurisdiction over the person of such defendant in error.” Sec. 2914, Rev. Gen. Stats., 1920.

The Clerk of the Circuit Court who issued the Writ of Error makes affidavit that he “did personally issue the Writ of Error” in the case; “that the word “May” in said attest part of said Writ of Error is not in my handwriting, but is in the handwriting of some one unknown to me”; “that I do not now know the date'originally inserted in the attest clause of said Writ of Error nor the date upon which it purported to have been issued when originally drawn, but that I do know that the name of the month originally inserted and written into said attest clause of said Writ of Error has been erased or taken out by ink eradieator or some other substance and the word 'May’ for the name of said month has been inserted or written therein in place and in lieu of the name of the month first written therein and afterwards eradicated, so that now said writ in its altered form purports to have been issued the 28th of May, A. D. 1925; and that said Writ of Error since it was originally issued has been modified, changed and altered; that such change or alteration was made by someone unknown to me, and was not made under my direction and was not made with my knowledge or consent; that said Writ of Error as originally issued was dtrly recorded in the minutes of the .Circuit Court of Palm Beach County, Florida, in book on page 171, and that I have examined the said record of said Writ of Error and find that the record has been altered and changed since it was originally made in this: The entire word for the name of the month in the attest clause of said *870 writ as the same was originally spread upon said record is not intact nor as it originally appeared upon said record; that the first two letters of said word,'viz: the letters ‘Ma’ are intact and then it appears that the balance of the word has been erased or taken out by ink eradicator or some other substance and the letter ‘y’ added to the portion remaining in lieu of the portion eradicated so as it now appears from said record in its altered form that said Writ of Error was attested on the 28th day of May, A. D. 1925; that the record of said Writ of Error has been changed and altered in the particulars pointed out and since the record was first made, and that such change and alteration was made by. some one unknown to me and was not. made under my direction nor with my knowledge or consent; that I do. not .now know what date was originally inserted in the attest clause of said Writ of Error; I have been informed that it was the 28th day of March, A. D. 1925; and I cannot now say that I did or did not date the Writ of Error back or antedate the same at the time of issuance, and if I did, I can not now say whether.it was done intentionally for some purpose under the direction of some one interested or was done merely accidentally and inadvertently. ’ ’

In another affidavit the same clerk deposes “that he has personally examined the file in tire above entitled cause, and that there appears in said file a praecipe for a Writ of Error, which said praecipe bears the file mark, in his own handwriting, of Majr 28th, A. D. 1925; that said file mark shows no evidence of alteration or change, but is now in exactly the same condition as it was when made. This affiant further says that he does not, in any cause, issue a Writ of Error until after or upon the same date of the filing of a praecipe for such Writ, and that in this cause he did not issue a Writ of Error prior to May 28th, A. D. 1925; that he has checked the records in said cause as they appear *871 in his office, and that.he has also checked the file in said cause, which is kept in his office, and that neither said record nor said file shows any praecipe for a Writ of Error bearing a file mark previous to May 28th, A. D. 1925; that if.said original Writ of Error on file in this Honorable Court bears any evidence of -change or alteration, that he has no knowledge of how, when or by whom said.change was made, but that the date of said Writ of Error, to-wit, May 28th, A. D. 1925, is the true and correct date upon which said writ of error was issued; that he has four deputy clerks under him and no more, namely, Stella M. Thomas, Merle P. Johnston, Leon D. Bushong, and P. L. Burnett; that the above named deputies are the only persons in his office authorized to act as deputy clerks and that no other persons in his office are authorized to issue process or to sign other papers or certificates in his name as deputy clerk.”

The four named persons severally made affidavit “that if any changes or alteration has been made in the writ of error in the above cause, or if any change or alteration has been made in the record of said writ of error as the same is recorded in Minute Book 14, at page 171, of the Minutes of the Circuit Court of Palm Beach County, Florida, that such changes or alterations were not made by him or her or under his or her direction or with his or her knowledge or consent, and that he or she does not know when, nor by whom, such changes or alterations were made.''

Eva Winter “deposes and says that she is an employee in the office of Fred E. Fenno, Clerk of the Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach County, Florida; that she has been so employed since May 1st, A. D. 1925; that she has inspected the Circuit Court Minute Book No. 14, at page 171, and the several pages immediately following; and this affiant further says that, as a part of her duties as such employee in said office under the direction of said Fred E. *872 Fenno, she entered in said Minute Book No.

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

Related

Rye v. Banks
63 So. 825 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1913)
Gadsden v. State
80 So. 308 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1918)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
107 So. 185, 90 Fla. 867, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/farmers-bank-trust-co-v-power-fla-1925.