Malone v. Meres (1926)

See Parker Bros. v. Fagan, 68 F.2d 616, 618 (5th Cir.1934); Malone v. Meres, [ 91 Fla. 709 ], 109 So. 677, 684-89 (Fla.1926).

See Parker Bros. v. Fagan, 68 F.2d 616, 618 (5th Cir.1934); Malone v. Meres, [ 91 Fla. 709 ], 109 So. 677, 684-89 (Fla.1926). 20 Jaffe et al. also assert that, because they were held in default, they have been unable to litigate the issue of the jurisdiction of the state court and, thus, they may raise the jurisdictional issue against enforcement of the judgment in this proceeding.

Jurisdiction refers to “[a] court’s power to decide a case or issue a decree.” Jurisdiction, Black’s Law Dictionary (12th ed. 2024); see also Malone v. Meres, 109 So. 677, 683 (Fla. 1926) (“ ‘Jurisdiction,’ in the strict meaning of the term, as applied to judicial officers and tribunals, means no more than the power lawfully existing to hear and determine a cause.”).

It does not depend upon the ultimate existence of a good cause of action in the plaintiff, in the particular case before the court.” Id. (quoting Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 725 , 109 So. 677, 683 (1926)).

Jurisdiction 2 does not relate to the right of the parties, as between each other, but to the power of the court.” (emphasis omitted) (quoting Malone v. Meres, 109 So. 677, 683 (Fla. 1926))). “[S]ubject matter jurisdiction is never waivable.” Sapp v. Sims Crane & Equip.

"Jurisdiction of the subject-matter does not mean jurisdiction of the particular case but of the class of cases to which the particular case belongs, and does not depend upon the sufficiency of the pleadings nor the rightfulness of the decision." Malone v. Meres, 109 So. 677, 685 (Fla. 1926).

Cf. Malone v. Meres, 109 So. 677, 682 (Fla. 1926) (explaining that an otherwise valid judgment “is binding, even though erroneous because of irregularity of procedure,” and it “will not be set aside, reversed, or modified, except by appropriate direct appellate procedure”).

It “means no more than the power lawfully existing to hear and determine a cause.” Malone v. Meres, 109 So. 677, 684 (Fla. 1926).

Later, in Cunningham v. Standard Guaranty Insurance Co., 630 So.2d 179 (Fla. 1994), the Florida Supreme Court reaffirmed the principle that subject matter jurisdiction is the “ ‘power lawfully conferred to deal with the general subject involved.in the action’” and ‘“does not depend upon, the ultimate existence of a good cause of action in the plaintiff, in the particular case before the court.’ ” Id. at 181 (quoting Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677, 683 (1926)).

Id. at 684, 686 (emphasis supplied) (citations omitted).

Co., 630 So.2d 179, 181 (Fla.1994) (citing Lovett v. Lovett, 93 Fla. 611 , 112 So. 768 (1927) (advising subject matter jurisdiction concerns a court’s power to deal with a class of cases to which a particular case belongs, not an individual case)); Godfrey v. Reliance Wholesale, Inc., 68 So.3d 930, 932 (Fla. 3d DCA 2011) (“Subject matter jurisdiction ‘means no more than the power lawfully existing to hear and determine a cause.’ ”) (quoting Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 725 …

Co., 630 So.2d 179, 181 (Fla.1994) (quoting Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677, 683 (Fla.1926)).” “Subject matter jurisdiction is conferred upon a court by a constitution or statute, and cannot be created by waiver, acquiescence or agreement of the parties.” Snider v. Snider, 686 So.2d 802, 804 (Fla. 4th DCA 1997).

Co., 630 So.2d 179, 181 (Fla.1994)) (quoting Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677, 683 (1926)).

Co., 630 So.2d 179, 181 (Fla.1994) (quoting Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677, 683 (1926)).

"If the court has acquired jurisdiction of the subject-matter and of the parties, the judgment or decree entered is binding, even though erroneous because of irregularity of procedure, and such judgment or decree will not be set aside, reversed, or modified, except by appropriate direct appellate procedure." Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 720 , 109 So. 677, 682 (1926).

Cunningham, 630 So.2d at 181 (quoting Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 725 , 109 So. 677, 683 (1926)); see also Bell v. Kornblatt, 705 So.2d 113, 114 (Fla. 4th DCA)("Subject matter jurisdiction is the power of a court to adjudicate the type of case before it.

Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 725 , 109 So. 677, 683 (1926) (citation omitted).

Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 731 , 109 So. 677, 685 (1926).

Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677, 684 (1926) stated: “ ‘Jurisdiction of a subject-matter of an action is a power to adjudge concerning the general question involved therein, and is not dependent upon the state of facts which may appear in a particular case, or the ultimate existence of a good cause of action in the plaintiff therein.

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 ; Voges, v. Ward, supra; Helton v. Sinclair, 93 Fla. 1121 , 1126, 113 So. 568 , 570.

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677, 683 (1926) ("... if [a court should] act without authority, its judgments and orders are regarded as nullities.

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709, 724 , 109 So. 677, 683 (1926).

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 (1926); Falkner v. Amerifirst Federal Savings and Loan, 489 So.2d 758 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).

See also Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 (1926).

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 (1926); Childs v. Boots, 112 Fla. 277 , 152 So. 212 (1933); Harvey v. City of St.

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 ; Kroier v. Kroier, 95 Fla. 865 , 116 So. 753 ; Goodrich v. Thompson, 96 Fla. 327 , 118 So. 60 ; Frostproof State Bank v. Mallett, 100 Fla. 1464 , 131 So. 322 ; Fisher v. Guidy, 106 Fla. 94 , 142 So. 818 ; McGee v. McGee, 156 Fla. 346 , 22 So.2d 788 .

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 , and cases there cited.

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 .

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 .

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 South.

See Malone v. Meyer, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 .

See Malone v. Meres, 91 Fla. 709 , 109 So. 677 ; McDaniel v. McElvy, 91 Fla. 770 , 108 So.

See Crumpton v. Crumpton, 443 So. 2d 315, 317 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983) (citing Malone v. Meres, 109 So. 677 (Fla. 1926)) (“A trial court has a duty to decide issues properly before it.”); Armour v. McMiller, 15 So. 3d 923, 925 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009) (reversing award of support where trial court failed to determine net income of each parent under section 61.30 and include such findings in its judgment).

See id. at 685 ("To authorize the assertion that a judgment is void, it must have emanated from a court of limited jurisdiction not acting within its legitimate prerogative or from a court of general jurisdiction, where the parties are not actually or by legal construction before the court and subject to its jurisdiction."); see also World-Wide Volkswagen Corp. v. Woodson, 444 U.S. 286, 291 (1980) (holding that a judgment entered when a tribunal does not have personal jurisd…

See Tyson v. Aikman, 31 So. 2d 272 , and Malone v. Meres, 109 So. 677 .

See Malone v. Meres, 911 Fla. 709 , 109 Sou. 677 , wherein Mr. Justice Brown writing the opinion for the Court very fully discussed the legal principles applicable to a case of this sort and enunciated the established controlling rule.

See Malone v. Meres, 109 South.