Smith v. O'Brien, 78 So. 14 (Fla. 1918). · Go Syfert
Search
Smith v. O'Brien, 78 So. 14 (Fla. 1918). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
85 citation events (46 in the last 25 years) across 4 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Susan M. Simmons, as Personal Representative, Etc. v. Mark A. Simmons, Etc. (fladistctapp, 2026-04-15)
Treatment trajectory · 1927 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1927 1976 2026
Top citers, strongest first. 39 distinct citers. How cited ↗
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Susan M. Simmons, as Personal Representative, Etc. v. Mark A. Simmons, Etc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2026 · confidence medium
If reasonable men could differ as to the propriety of the action taken by the trial court, then it cannot be said that the trial court abused its discretion.” (quotation omitted)); Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918) (“It has generally been held that the interest which will entitle a person to intervene under this provision must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervener will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Yoandra Mendoza v. Kendall Park Plaza, Ltd. (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2026 · confidence medium
Ordinarily, an interest supporting intervention “must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.” Id. at 507 (quoting Morgareidge, 78 So. 14 at 15).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Lawonda Breedlove v. David M. Gersten, Etc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2026 · confidence medium
Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Adena Testa, individually and as co-trustee of the Michael David Testa Revocable Trust v. Town of Jupiter Island and Dolphin Suite, LLC
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So. 2d 505, 507 (Fla. 1992) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Med Rehab Therapy Center Inc. v. Direct General Insurance Company
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2024 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So. 2d 505, 507 (Fla. 1992) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918)); see also Accident911 Help Med.
cited Cited as authority (rule) ACCIDENT911 HELP MEDICAL CENTER CORP. v. DIRECT GENERAL INSURANCE COMPANY
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2023 · confidence medium
Carlisle, 593 So. 2d at 507 (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 238- 39, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Larrain Troncoso v. Ossandon Larrain
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2019 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So. 2d 505, 507 (Fla. 1992) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) HOUSTON SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY v. ENOCH VAUGHN
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2018 · confidence medium
In other words, the interest must be that created by a claim to the demand in suit or some part thereof, or a claim to, or lien upon, the property or some part thereof, which is the subject of litigation. -6- Id. (alteration in original) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) C & J GLOBAL INVESTMENTS, INC. v. CAPGAIN PROPERTIES, INC.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2018 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So. 2d 505, 507 (Fla. 1992) (alteration in original) (omission in original) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Symcon Development Group Corp. v. Passero
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
In other words, the interest must be that created by a claim to the demand in suit or some part thereof, or a claim to, or lien upon, the property or some part thereof, which is the subject of litigation.” Miracle House Corp. v. Haige, 96 So.2d 417, 418 (Fla. 1957) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Estate of Arroyo v. Infinity Indemnity Insurance Co.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Carlisle, 593 So. 2d at 507 (holding that “the interest must be that created by a claim to the demand in suit or some part thereof . . . which is the subject of litigation”) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918); Y.H. v. F.L.H., 784 So. 2d 565, 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); 84 Lumber Co. v. Cooper, 656 So. 2d 1297, 1299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (stating that “intervention under [rule 1.230] assumes an interest in pending litigation which shall be in subordination to, and in recognition of, the propriety of the main proceeding”) (internal quotation omitted).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Reyes v. Infinity Indemnity Insurance Co.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2017 · confidence medium
Carlisle, 593 So. 2d at 507 (holding that “the interest must be that created by a claim to the demand in suit or some part thereof . . . which is the subject of litigation”) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918); Y.H. v. F.L.H., 784 So. 2d 565, 568 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)); 84 Lumber Co. v. Cooper, 656 So. 2d 1297, 1299 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994) (stating that “intervention under [rule 1.230] assumes an interest in pending litigation which shall be in subordination to, and in recognition of, the propriety of the main proceeding”) (internal quotation omitted).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Joyce Genauer, Rochelle Kevelson and Tikvah Lyons v. Downey & Downey, P.A., and Branch Banking And Trust Company, etc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2016 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1992) (omission in original) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Southern Comfort Grill, Inc. v. Hanks Construction, LLC Nick Nico, Jr. and Barbara J. Nico
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2015 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1992) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Highwoods DLF EOLA, LLC v. Condo Developer, LLC
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2010 · confidence medium
In addition, Highwoods meets the long-standing test for intervention set forth in Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918): “[T]he interest which will entitle a person to intervene ... must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.” In this case, Condo Developer seeks to quash the order granting Highwoods’ requested master plan amendment, and allowing Highwoods to develop its property in accordance with its plans.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Litvak v. Scylla Properties, LLC
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1992); Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918). . . .
cited Cited as authority (rule) Harbor Specialty Ins. Co. v. Schwartz
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2006 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1992) (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918)).
cited Cited as authority (rule) Barnhill v. FLORIDA MICROSOFT LITIGATION
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2005 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505 (Fla.1992)(quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Schindler v. Schiavo
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2004 · confidence medium
Rather, the trial court must find not only that the movant has an interest in the matter in litigation, but also that the movant's interest is "of such a direct and immediate character that the intervener will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment." Id. at 15.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Sullivan v. Sapp
Fla. · 2004 · confidence medium
In other words, the interest must be that created by a claim to the demand in suit or some part thereof, or a claim to, or lien upon, the property or some part thereof, which is the subject of litigation. 593 So.2d at 507 (quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Kissoon v. Araujo
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · confidence medium
As reiterated in numerous cases, the test to determine what interest entitles a party to intervene was set forth in Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234, 238-39 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918): [T]he interest which will entitle a person to intervene ... must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.
cited Cited as authority (rule) Beeler v. Banco Indus. De Venezuela
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2003 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1992)(citing Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234, 238-39 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Hausmann Ex Rel. Doe v. LM
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
In Union Central Life Insurance Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1992), the court set forth the test for intervention: The test to determine what interest entitles a party to intervene is set forth in Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234, 238-39 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918): [T]he interest which will entitle a person to intervene ... must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Y.H. v. F.L.H. (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1992); Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Yh v. Flh (2×)
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2001 · confidence medium
Co. v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla.1992); Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Providence Washington Insurance Co. v. Southern Guarantee Insurance Co.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1995 · confidence medium
In Carlisle , the court expressly reaffirmed the test to determine entitlement to intervention set forth in Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234, 238-39 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918): [T]he interest which will entitle a person to intervene ... must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.
cited Cited as authority (rule) In Interest of Ssj
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1994 · confidence medium
Union Central Life Insurance Company v. Carlisle, 593 So.2d 505, 507 (Fla. 1992) (citing Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234, 238-39 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918)).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) John G. Grubbs, Inc. v. Suncoast Excavating, Inc. (2×) also: Cited "see"
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1992 · confidence medium
This court related the test set out in Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918), "[t]o determine whether a trial court has abused its discretion in denying a motion for intervention": [T]he interest which will entitle a person to intervene under this provision must be in the matter of litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervener will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Carlisle
Fla. · 1992 · confidence medium
The test to determine what interest entitles a party to intervene is set forth in Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234, 238-39 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918): [T]he interest which will entitle a person to intervene ... must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Union Cent. Life Ins. Co. v. Carlisle
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1990 · confidence medium
It is true that in Southland Life Insurance Company v. Abelove, 556 So.2d 805, 806 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990), the Fifth District found such an abuse and enunciated the test "[t]o determine whether a trial court has abused its discretion in denying a motion for intervention," quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (Fla. 1918) as follows: [T]he interest which will entitle a person to intervene under this provision must be in the matter in litigation, and of such a direct and immediate character that the intervener will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of …
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Southland Life Ins. Co. v. Abelove
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1990 · confidence medium
To determine whether a trial court has abused its discretion in denying a motion for intervention, the Florida Supreme Court's general test established in Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918), continues to be applied.
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Castro Convertible Corporation v. Julie Ann Castro
5th Cir. · 1979 · confidence medium
The interest claimed cannot be merely an indirect interest in the case but “must be that created by a claim to the demand in suit or some part thereof, or a claim to, or lien upon, the property or some part thereof, which is the subject of litigation.” Miracle House Corp. v. Haige, 96 So.2d 417, 418 (Fla.1957), quoting Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918).
discussed Cited as authority (rule) Division of Administration v. Rice
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1973 · confidence medium
In other words, the interest must be that created by a claim to the demand in suit or some part thereof, or a claim to, or lien upon, the property or some part thereof, which is the subject of litigation.” Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 (1918); accord, Miracle House Corp. v. Haige, 96 So.2d 417 (Fla.1957); Oster v. Cay Construction Co., 204 So.2d 539 (Fla.App.1967).
discussed Cited "see" Fasig v. Florida Society of Pathologists
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 2000 · signal: see · confidence high
See Morgareidge, 78 So. at 15 ; compare Heatherwood Community Homeowners Assoc., Inc. v. Florida Rock Ind., Inc., 629 So.2d 928, 929 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)(1992)("the only possible adverse effect that a judgment by the trial court could have on [appellant] would be to require it to be involved in representing its position in new hearings ... [t]his is not the kind of interest that will support intervention"). [4] Next, appellants argue that the possible entry of a permanent injunction prohibiting Central States from making misrepresentations about professional component billing creates a direct a…
cited Cited "see" Humana Health Plans v. Lawton
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1996 · signal: see · confidence high
See Morgareidge [ v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14 (1918)].
cited Cited "see" W. Klang & Son, Inc. v. Milar Galleries, Inc.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1976 · signal: see · confidence high
See Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14, 15 ; Miracle House Corporation v. Haige, Fla., 96 So.2d 417 .
cited Cited "see" Aiken v. Aiken
Fla. · 1955 · signal: see · confidence high
See Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14 , and Singletary v. Mann, 157 Fla. 37 , 24 So.2d 718 , 166 A.L.R. 904 .
cited Cited "see" Cracowaner Et Ux. v. Worthington
Fla. · 1931 · signal: see · confidence high
See Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14 .
discussed Cited "see, e.g." Fla. Wildlife Federation v. Internal Imp.
Fla. Dist. Ct. App. · 1998 · signal: see also · confidence low
See also Morgareidge v. Howey, 75 Fla. 234 , 78 So. 14 (1918) (finding the interest necessary to entitle the right to intervene must be of such a direct and immediate character that the intervenor will either gain or lose by the direct legal operation and effect of the judgment.) The trial court correctly applied the two-step analysis established by Union Central.
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
H. M. and M. O. Smith
v.
P. O'Brien
Supreme Court of Florida.
Feb 13, 1918.
78 So. 14
T. W. Fielding and Evans Haile, for Appellants; ., B. A. Thrasher, for Appellee.
Browne, Ellis, Taylor, West, Whitfield.
Published
West, J.

This is a companion case to the case of A. W. Smith v. P. O’Brien.

The two cases grew out of the same transaction, the pleadings are practically the same, the answers in the two cases are identical, with the exception of the names of the parties, and by agreement of counsel in the court below the testimony taken was used in both the cases.

This case is therefore affirmed upon the authority of A. W. Smith v. P. O’Brien, the opinion in which case is filed today.

Browne, C. J., and Taylor, Whitfield and Ellis, J. J. concur.