Harris v. Ferris

Citations

• 18 Fla. 84

Syllabus

<p>1. A party entering into possession of property as lessee for a term of years under a contract to expend $1,000 in improving the property and to divide net profits with the lessor, is under obligation to keep an accurate account of his receipts and disbursements. These accounts the lessor has a right to examine. Where the lessee fails for years to render an account, keeps his accounts, such as they are, in an awkward and unintelligible manner, and makes expenditures unauthorized by his contract, his conduct is such as not to recommend l/im or his statements to favorable consideration.</p> <p>%. Where the testimony upon which the master stated an account is lost, the appellant admitting that it was the principal testimony relied upon by both parties in the matter of expenditure, the action of the court sustaining' the master must be presumed to be correct. In such a case, unless the appellant can show, in the absence of this testimony, “that no case could have existed, it being present,” he cannot prevail.</p> <p>3. A lessee thus in possession is not entitled to personal compensation for managing the property.</p> <p>4. Where, upon a second reference, after exceptions to master’s first report allowed, order of confirmation having been passed as to other matters, the master connects a mistake in an allowance made in the first report, which was not made the subject of exception thereto, such second report being in this respect outside of the second order, is erroneous to that extent. The proper method to correct this error is not to except, but to apply to the court to refer the matter back for review. Where this method is not adopted and the matter is improperly made the subject of an exception, which the chancellor overrules, this court, upon appeal, will not reverse the decree if the matter of the exception was within the accounting directed by the original decree, and the presumption is that the action of the master and the court was just and proper.</p>