Price v. Boden

Citations

• 39 Fla. 218

Syllabus

<p>1. After a decree pro confesso has been regularly entered against a defendant in a chancery cause he so far loses his standing in the court as not to be entitled to notice or hearing in the future proceedings.</p> <p>2. It is not error to enter a final decree against a defendant under a default on the same day that the report of a master is filed, if the case is in a condition otherwise to be decreed.</p> <p>3. While the proceedings after a decree pro confesso are evparter and the party in default not entitled to notice, or of right to-be heard, the final decree is not one as of course according to the prayer of the bill, or as the complainant chooses to make it, but it should be made by the court according to what is-proper to be decreed upon the statements of the bill assumed, to be true.</p> <p>4. In a bill filed to enforce a mechanic’s lien under the statutes in-force prior to the adoption of the Revised Statutes, no demand was made for attorney- fees and no allegation in reference to such matter was contained in the bill, and after a decree proeonfesso complainant obtained a decree for attorney fees: Held, Without considering whether attorney fees in any case on a bill to enforce a mechanic’s lien under the statute then in force could be allowed, that the allowance of the fee[on the-bill in this case was erroneous.</p>