EDRA PEACOCK, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF VIRGIL EUGENE PEACOCK, APPELLANT/CROSS-APPELLEE
v.
WILLIE E. MELVIN AND ERNEST F. MELVIN, APPELLEES/CROSS-APPELLANTS
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.
In this Florida appellate case, the court affirmed a trial judge's findings that Virgil Peacock was competent and not under undue influence when he executed two deeds and a bill of sale in favor of Willie Melvin, and that a title to a mobile home and accompanying affidavit failed to effect a transfer.
The appellate court affirmed the trial judge's findings, holding that findings of fact by a trial judge sitting without a jury are entitled to the same presumption of correctness as a jury verdict, and will not be disturbed on appeal if supported by any credible evidence, even if the appellate court would have reached a different conclusion.
[1] Findings of a trial judge sitting as trier of fact are clothed with the same presumption of correctness accorded a jury verdict.
[2] In a trial without a jury, the trial judge must evaluate and weigh the testimony and the evidence presented and judge the credibility of the witnesses.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“the findings of a trial judge sitting as trier of fact are clothed with the same presumption of correctness accorded a jury verdict”
Establishes the standard of review for trial court findings of fact on appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceVirgil Peacock, now deceased, executed two deeds and a bill of sale in favor of Willie Melvin. The trial judge found Peacock was competent and not und…
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 Competent Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This appeal arises from a final judgment in which the trial judge found that Virgil Peacock, since deceased, was competent and not under undue influence when he executed two deeds and a bill of sale in favor of Appellee Willie Melvin. The cross-appeal challenges the trial court’s finding that title to Peacock’s mobile home and an accompanying affidavit failed to effect a transfer of Peacock’s mobile home. We affirm.
Having read counsels’ briefs and heard oral argument, we must note from the outset that the findings of a trial judge sitting as trier of fact are clothed with the same presumption of correctness accorded a jury verdict. Stockton, Whatley, Damn & Co. v. Brock, 349 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).
In a trial without a jury, the trial judge must evaluate and weigh the testimony and the evidence presented and judge the credibility of the witnesses. Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla.1976).
An appellate court should not substitute its own judgment for that of the trial court by engaging in a reevaluation of the testimony and the record. Herzog v. Herzog, 346 So. 2d 56 (Fla.1977).
Instead, the accuracy of the trial judge’s conclusions on fact questions is tested by interpreting the evidence and all reasonable inferences capable of being drawn from them in the light most favorable to the trial court’s conclusions. Cameron v. State 112 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959).
Although a trial court’s findings of fact must have a basis in the record, they will not be disturbed on appeal if they are supported by any credible evidence “[e]ven if the appellate court disagrees with the trial court and would have reached a different conclusion had it been in the shoes of the trial court.” Herzog, 346 So. 2d at 58; Leath v. State, 333 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).
In the instant case, we find the trial judge’s findings are supported by competent evidence, and we affirm.
MINER, WEBSTER and BENTON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So. 2d 13 (Fla. 1976)
- Herzog v. Herzog, 346 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1977)
- Cameron v. State, 112 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959)
- Stockton v. Brock, 349 So. 2d 175 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Leath v. State, 333 So. 2d 122 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)