McClusky v. Trussel
Cases that cite this one
32 later published cases cite this decision. The 25 that cite it most often are listed here.
- Department of Transportation v. Mid-Peninsula Realty Investment Group, LLC (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)
- Kelvin Lumber & Supply Co. v. Copper State Mining Co. (Tex. App. 1918)
- The Travelers Indemnity Company of Connecticut v. Richard McKenzie & Sons, Inc. (11th Cir. 2021)
- Department of Transportation v. Mid-Peninsula Realty Investment Group, LLC (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2015)
- Medina v. Orange County (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1992)
- Wash-Bowl Vending Co. v. No. 3 Condominium Ass'n, Village Green (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)
- Georgia-Pacific Corp. v. Department of Revenue (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)
- Southside Atlantic Bank v. Lewis (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1965)
- Boynton v. Harbison (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1961)
- Walton Land and Timber Co. v. Long (Fla. 1939)
- Baxter v. Thompson (Fla. 1938)
- Bringley v. C. I. T. Corporation (Fla. 1935)
- Gibson v. Longino (Fla. 1933)
- Gentile Bros. v. Bryan (Fla. 1931)
- Roux v. Houk (Fla. 1931)
- Griffith v. Hulion (Fla. 1925)
- Prescott v. J. S. Betts Co. (Fla. 1921)
- Clark ex rel. Townsend-Bower Co. v. Cochran (Fla. 1920)
- Walters v. Sheffield (Fla. 1918)
- Gracy v. Seaboard Air Line Railway (Fla. 1915)
- Stokes v. Humphries (Fla. 1915)
- Groce v. West Lumber Co. (Tex. App. 1913)
- Dundee Naval Stores Co. v. McDowell (Fla. 1913)
- Graves v. J. M. Harris & Brother (Fla. 1912)
- Bell v. Niles (Fla. 1911)
This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.
Opinion of the Court
delivered the opinion of the court.
The sale was manifestly void, because not made (Code 1892, § 2443) in conformity with the provisions of section 111 of the Constitution of 1890. W. W. Trussell testified: “Mr. J. B. Spencer bid the land off on first bid for the Frank estate. . Mr. Shaw sold the whole four hundred-tract in a lump.” Volney Weir testified: “The land was sold in a lump on the first bid.” The overwhelming weight of the testimony is to the effect, so far as the statute of limitations is concerned, that the purchaser did not enter into possession at the sale, nor within any time which would bar this action. The bill was filed August 30, 1905. The clear preponderance of the evidence- — its overwhelming weight, indeed — is to the effect that the appellees and those under whom they claim did not have possession of the land until some time in the year 1896.
The decree is reversed and the cause remanded, in accordance with this opinion.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.