| Fla. | Jun 17, 1914
In an action brought by the corporation against A. Lee Humphreys as an endorser before delivery of certain promissory notes, there was a directed verdict for the defendant, on which a judgment was rendered that “the defendant, A. Lee Humphreys, do have and recover of and from the plaintiff, C. W. Zaring & Company, a Corporation, * * * the sum of five and 40-100 dollars here taxed as his costs.” There was no other judgment for the defendant. A writ of error was taken by the plaintiff corporation.
A judgment for costs alone, though entered for the defendant after a verdict in his favor, will not support a writ of error, since such a judgment does not adjudicate the merits of the cause or dispose of the action, and is consequently not a final judgment. Graves v. J. M. Harris & Bro., 61 Fla. 234, 54 South. Rep. 390; Dexter v. Sea
Where a writ of error purports to be taken to a final judgment and no final judgment appears in the transcript of the record proper,.the court should not proceed to con-' sider the errors assigned, but should dismiss the writ of error, whether a motion be made for that purpose or not Flournoy v. Interstate Electric Co., 61 Fla. 214" court="Fla." date_filed="1911-01-15" href="https://app.midpage.ai/document/flournoy-v-interstate-electric-co-4917708?utm_source=webapp" opinion_id="4917708">61 Fla. 214, 55 South. Rep. 983.
Attention is called to the fact that the transcript does not contain an exception to the order overruling the motion for a new trial.
The writ of error is dismissed.
Hocker, J., absent.