Meres v. Clayton

120 So. 766, 97 Fla. 329
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided March 9, 1929·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In a mortgage foreclosure the defense was payment and the bill of complaint was dismissed. Complainant appealed. Payment being an affirmative defense it should be shown by a clear preponderance of the evidence. 42 C. J. 117, Section 1677.

As to payment of the entire debt the evidence is indefinite, and the decree is reversed and the cause remanded for appropriate proceedings.

It is so ordered.

Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.

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

Meres v. Clayton, 120 So. 766, 97 Fla. 329 (Fla. 1929).

120 So. 766 (Meres v. Clayton) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Wiggins v. Morrison
242 So. 2d 184 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. v. Smith
184 So. 513 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1938)