JOA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
LAMERICA REALTY COMPANY OF MIAMI, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment for the appellee in a breach of real estate brokerage contract case because the appellant failed to file the trial testimony necessary for appellate review.
When trial testimony is not reported or filed in the appellate record, the appellate court cannot review the trial court's factual findings and must affirm the judgment.
[1] An appellate court must affirm a trial court judgment when the appellant fails to file trial testimony in the appellate record, preventing meaningful review of the trial…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJOA Corporation, as defendant, was sued by LaMerica Realty Company for breach of a real estate brokerage contract seeking damages. The trial court rul…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Record Sufficiency cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellant herein, defendant in the trial court, seeks review of an adverse final judgment entered by the trial court, sitting as trier of the fact, in a case wherein the appellee sought damages for breach of a real estate brokerage contract.
The appellant has raised 5 points on appeal all of which go either to the question of whether the appellee was hired to complete the sale and whether it produced a buyer ready and willing to purchase the property. The trial court’s ruling was predicated in part on the testimony of the parties which was neither reported or filed in this court.1 Thus this court is unable to review the correctness of the order appealed and therefore the final judgment here under review is affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979); Lang v. Lang, 416 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982); Kauffmann v. Baker, 392 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).
Affirmed.
. Pursuant to Rule 9.200(f)(2), Fla.R.App.P., we entered an order directing the appellant to complete the record on appeal in accordance with Rule 9.200(a), (b), (f), Fla.R.App.P. Notwithstanding this order the appellant failed to supplement the record with any testimony or statement pursuant to applicable appellate rules.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Chamberlain v. Chamberlain, 588 So. 2d 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…to ensure that the record is prepared and transmitted in accordance with these rules shall be on the ... appellant.” If the record is insufficient to demonstrate reversible error, the case must be affirmed. JOA Corp. v. Lamerica Realty Co. of Miami, 435 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); see also, City of Hialeah v. Cascardo, 443 So. 2d 448 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Because the hearing which resulted in the revocation of rehabilitative alimony was not recorded, there is no way to know what evidence was presented or wh…
-
Meyer v. Robert E. Schack, P.A., 620 So. 2d 246 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla.1979); JOA Corp. v. Lamerica Realty Co. of Miami, 435 So. 2d 972 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983).…
-
Marcus v. Sullivan, 701 So. 2d 660 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…rial court sits as a finder of fact, and its ruling rests upon the testimony of the parties which is not part of the record on appeal, “this court is unable to review the correctness of the order appealed.” JOA Corp. v. Lamerica Realty Co. of Miami, 435 So. 2d 972, 973 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); see also Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979). For that reason, and because “[a] trial court’s findings of fact come to this court clothed with a presumption of correctness,” Gergora v.…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Kauffmann v. Baker, 392 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)
- Lang v. Lang, 416 So. 2d 480 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982)