Malone v. Meres
Florida Supreme Court
109 So. 677 (1926)
- Written by Liz Nakamura, JD
Facts
Frank Malone (defendant) and Ernest Meres (plaintiff) entered into a contract of sale involving personal property. Meres filed a breach-of-contract suit against Malone in chancery court and sought to enforce a lien against the subject personal property. A chancery court is a court of equity, and a lien is an equitable remedy. Malone appeared in the chancery-court action and filed an answer demanding proof of the alleged breach but did not challenge the jurisdiction of the chancery court. The chancery court ruled for Meres and ordered a foreclosure and sale of the personal property. Malone moved to vacate the verdict, arguing that the chancery court’s judgment was void because (1) the chancery court, a court in equity, did not have subject-matter jurisdiction over Meres’s claim; and (2) even if the court had subject-matter jurisdiction, the chancery court’s exercise of jurisdiction was inappropriate because Meres had an adequate and available remedy-at-law. The chancery court denied Malone’s motion to vacate, holding that it had jurisdiction over Meres’s claim. Malone appealed.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Whitfield, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 811,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
