Haimovitz v. Hawk

Citations

• 80 Fla. 272
• 85 So. 668

Syllabus

<p>1. After a demurrer to the whole bill is overruled a second demurrer to the whole bill is not allowable.</p> <p>%. To an amended bill the defendant has a right to interpose a new demurrer, notwithstanding a previous demurrer to the bill has been overruled.</p> <p>3. The orderly procedure for testing the legal sufficiency of a bill, whether before or after amendment, is by demurrer, and in this way only can the question be saved for review on appeal.</p> <p>4. ^The execution, of notes and a mortgage on real estate to secure the payment of such notes by individuals as trustees is sufficient to put persons dealing with such instruments upon inquiry of the powers possessed by such individuals.</p> <p>5. Where the validity of instruments sought to be enforced depends upon whether the persons' executing such instruments had power to do so, it is necessary to allege and prove the existence of such power.</p> <p>6. Where complainant relies for his cause of action on a ratification of an unauthorized contract by a trustee or agent he must set out the facts necessary to constitute such ratification.</p> <p>7. When complainant asserts that validity has been imparted to an instrument invalid in its inception because of absence of authority in its makers to execute it, and upon the validity of which his right of recovery depends, he should set up the facts imparting such validity in order that defendants may know of what the cause of action consists.</p>