Hightower v. Russ

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hightower v. Russ

295 So. 2d 662, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 7122

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 13, 1974

DocketNo. U-129

StatusPublished

This text of 295 So. 2d 662 (Hightower v. Russ) 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

Hightower v. Russ, 295 So. 2d 662, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 7122 (Fla. Ct. App. 1974).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellants initiated the instant case by filing an ejectment action against appel-lees. The jury found against appellants who have now appealed.

The law of this state has always commanded that the petitioner in an ejectment action recover on the strength of his own title and not on alleged weaknesses of the claims of others to the land.¹ At the trial a land surveyor employed by appellants admitted that based on the legal description of the land given him by appellants he was unable to locate two acres to which appellants were alleging a claim. Appellants did not present for the jury’s consideration a competent abstract or other certified documents showing that title to the land was vested in appellants. Under the circumstances, the jury verdict was correct.

The judgment appealed is affirmed.

RAWLS, C. J., and JOHNSON and McCORD, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellants initiated the instant case by filing an ejectment action against appel-lees. The jury found against appellants who have now appealed.

The law of this state has always commanded that the petitioner in an ejectment action recover on the strength of his own title and not on alleged weaknesses of the claims of others to the land.¹ At the trial a land surveyor employed by appellants admitted that based on the legal description of the land given him by appellants he was unable to locate two acres to which appellants were alleging a claim. Appellants did not present for the jury’s consideration a competent abstract or other certified documents showing that title to the land was vested in appellants. Under the circumstances, the jury verdict was correct.

The judgment appealed is affirmed.

RAWLS, C. J., and JOHNSON and McCORD, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

295 So. 2d 662, 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 7122, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hightower-v-russ-fladistctapp-1974.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack