Meres v. Clayton, (1929)
Court: Supreme Court of Florida
Number:
Visitors: 3
Judges: PER CURIAM. —
Attorneys: McKay, Withers Ramsey, for Appellant;
Thomas Hamilton, for Appellee.
Filed: Mar. 09, 1929
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: 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.
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.
Source: CourtListener
