Lente v. Clarke
Citations
- 22 Fla. 515
Syllabus
<p>1. Where a defendant, after appearing specially and obtaining an order setting aside the service of an original process, submits the cause for decision on a demurrer to the bill, such submission constitutes a voluntary appearance, and gives the court jurisdiction of the person.</p> <p>2. A decree pro confesso cannot -be entered under the rules of chancery practice in this State for the want of an appearance of the defendant, but only fór a failure to file a demurrer, plea or answer.</p> <p>3. A decree pro confesso cannot be entered on the rule day to which a subpoena that has been personally served is returnable, and on Which the appearance is due, nor until the next succeeding rule day.</p> <p>4. No bill of exceptions nor formal noting of exceptions to the orders appealed from held to be necessary to enable the appellant to obtain a review of them on appeal. An entry in the lower court of an appeal from such orders and a due prosecution thereof is sufficient.</p> <p>5. Neither a seal nor subscribing witness is necessary to the validity of an agreement or contract for the sale of land, or the note or memorandum thereof under the statute of frauds.</p> <p>6. An agreement for the sale of land under the statute of frauds will be held sufficient as to its description of the land to be conveyed, if it so describes a particular piece or tract of land that it can be identified, located or found. A detailed description is not necessary where the description shows that a particular tract is within the minds of the contracting parties and intended to be oonveyed; parol evidence maybe resorted to, to apply the description or identify the tract, though such description be somewhat general.</p> <p>7. The following agreement : “I agree to make good titles in fee to my forty near the Garrison lands, in Hernando county, to Wm. K. Lente. Consideration $75.00 ; received. Thomas W. Clarke, witness M. P. O’Neal,” held to contain a sufficient description.</p> <p>8. The expression “fo
Judges: Raney
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
23 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.
- Pitek v. McGuireNew Mexico Supreme Court· 1947-09-09· cited 42×
- Black & Snyder v. Crowther & AndrianoMissouri Court of Appeals· 1898-04-04· cited 23×
- Zimmerman v. DiedrichSupreme Court of Florida· 1957-09-20· cited 21×
- Mendelson v. Great Western Bank, FSBDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1998-06-19· cited 20×
- Cox v. La PotaSupreme Court of Florida· 1954-12-21· cited 17×
- Bajrangi v. Magnethel Enterprises, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida· 1991-11-14· cited 16×
- Ansley v. GrahamSupreme Court of Florida· 1917-02-20· cited 16×
- Burns v. WitterOregon Supreme Court· 1910-04-19· cited 16×
- Wilds v. StateSupreme Court of Florida· 1920-04-24· cited 14×
- Stephens v. BradleySupreme Court of Florida· 1888-01-15· cited 10×
- Woodford v. AlexanderSupreme Court of Florida· 1895-01-15· cited 10×
- Conroy v. WoodcockSupreme Court of Florida· 1907-01-15· cited 9×
- Hopper v. NationSupreme Court of Kansas· 1908-05-09· cited 9×
- HUTCHINSON ISLAND REALTY v. BabcockDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 2004-02-27· cited 8×
- South Florida Citrus Land Co. v. WaldenSupreme Court of Florida· 1910-01-15· cited 6×
- Western World, Inc. v. DansbyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida· 1990-09-05· cited 5×
- Hill v. Gratigny Plateau Development Corp.Sixth Circuit· 1931-07-03· cited 5×
- FMS Management Systems v. Rodriguez (In Re Ranch House Motor Inn International, Inc.)M.D. Florida· 2006-01-17· cited 4×
- Schofield v. TalleySupreme Court of Florida· 1920-03-27· cited 4×
- Gunn v. BrowerSupreme Court of Kansas· 1909-12-11· cited 4×
Cites
11 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Harkness v. HydeSupreme Court· 1879-04-21· cited 220×
- Hurley v. BrownMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1868-01-15· cited 91×
- Mead v. ParkerMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1874-09-04· cited 77×
- Quinnin v. ReimersMichigan Supreme Court· 1881-10-12· cited 48×
- Colerick v. HooperIndiana Supreme Court· 1852-05-26· cited 38×
- White v. HermannIllinois Supreme Court· 1869-09-15· cited 35×
- Keil v. WestSupreme Court of Florida· 1885-06-15· cited 27×
- Scanlan v. GeddesMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1873-03-15· cited 27×
- Standley v. ArnowSupreme Court of Florida· 1869-07-01· cited 22×
- Slater v. SmithMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court· 1875-01-19· cited 14×
- Patrick v. SearsSupreme Court of Florida· 1883-01-15· cited 9×
Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.