RICHARD T. FERRY, APPELLANT,
v.
GERALD J. ABRAMS, A1A, D/B/A ABRAMS ARCHITECTS, 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.
In this breach of contract case, an architect sued a business owner for unpaid professional services. The trial court ruled against the owner, who appealed arguing the court failed to provide findings of fact and that the ruling was against the manifest weight of evidence. The appellate court affirmed, holding that specific findings of fact were not required and that the trial court's credibility determinations were entitled to deference.
The trial court did not err in failing to provide findings of fact because it clearly set forth the issues requiring resolution and by its ruling resolved those issues. The trial court's determination was not manifestly against the weight of evidence because sufficient competent evidence supported the ruling and the trial court, as fact-finder, is entitled to deference in resolving credibility conflicts.
[1] A trial court is not required to set forth specific findings of fact when the issues presented are clearly defined and the ruling resolves those issues.
[2] The finder of fact has the sole discretion to resolve conflicts in evidence and weigh the credibility of witnesses.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“It is the role of the finder of fact, whether a jury or a trial judge, to resolve conflicts in the evidence and to weigh the credibility of witnesses.”
Establishes the deference appellate courts give to trial judges' credibility determinations
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceGerald Abrams, an architect, rendered professional services and sued Richard Ferry for payment. The central dispute was whether Ferry individually or …
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 Conflicts In Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
ANTOON, Judge.
Gerald J. Abrams, an architect, sued Richard T. Ferry for breach of contract, seeking payment for professional services rendered. Much of the testimony presented at the non-jury trial concerned whether Mr. Ferry individually, or Sports Med, Inc., Mr. Ferry’s under-financed corporation, was hable for the professional fees. Early in the trial, the court reminded counsel that the issues were: what work was performed by the architect, which party the architect dealt with, and which party was responsible for the payment of the professional fees. At the conclusion of the evidence, the trial court entered judgment against Mr. Ferry for the full amount of the fees plus interest.
On appeal, Mr. Ferry challenges this ruling, arguing that the trial court erred in failing to set forth findings of fact to support its ruling, and that the ruling is “manifestly against the weight of evidence presented.” We affirm.
Mr. Ferry cites neither a statute nor a rule of court to support his contention that the trial court was required to set forth. findings of fact.
However, he cites Turner v. Lorber, 360 So. 2d 101 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978), which is distinct from the instant case. In this regard, Turner was a slip and fall negligence ease wherein the reviewing court was unable to determine whether the trial court had considered the defendant’s comparative negligence claim because no findings of fact were set forth in the final judgment.
The district court reversed the final judgment, holding that “under the facts of the case” the trial court’s failure to indicate whether it had considered the comparative negligence issue was error. Id. at 104. In comparison, the trial court in the instant case cogently set forth the issues requiring resolution, and by its ruling resolved those issues. Specific findings of fact are not necessary to determine whether these issues were considered.
In support of his assertion that the trial court’s ruling was against the manifest weight of the evidence, Mr. Ferry argues that the testimony of the architect’s witness should have been disregarded by the trial court because the testimony was biased and not credible. Mr. Ferry further suggests that if this testimony were stricken from the record, there would be a lack of substantial competent evidence to support the trial court’s ruling.
It is the role of the finder of fact, whether a jury or a trial judge, to resolve conflicts in the evidence and to weigh the credibility of witnesses. Great deference is afforded the finder of fact because it has the first-hand opportunity to see and hear the witnesses testify. Here, the trial court was presented with conflicting evidence which the court resolved in favor of the architect. Because the record contains sufficient competent evidence to support the trial court’s ruling, this court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the trial court. State v. Cardoso, 609 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992).
AFFIRMED.
PETERSON, C.J., and DAUKSCH, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (12 total)
-
Alpha v. Alpha, 885 So. 2d 1023 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…4 So. 2d 315 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Vaccaro v. Vaccaro, 677 So. 2d 918 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). . See Makowski v. Makowski, 613 So. 2d 924 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993). . See Bijlani v. Pioneer House Associates, 719 So. 2d 377 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Ferry v. Abrams, 679 So. 2d 80 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). . See § 61.075(7), Fla. Stat.; Robertson v. Robertson, 593 So. 2d 491 (Fla.1991); Dal Ponte v. Dal Ponte, 692 So. 2d 283 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Livingston v. Livingston, 633 So. 2d 1162 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Howes v. Howes, 613 So…
-
A.D. v. Dep't of Child. & Families, 837 So. 2d 1078 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003)…M.J.S. v. Department of Children and Families, 764 So. 2d 825 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). It is the role of the finder of fact, whether a jury or a trial judge, to resolve conflicts in the evidence and to weigh the credibility of witnesses. Ferry v. Abrams, 679 So. 2d 80, 81 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). Great deference is afforded the finder of fact because it has the first-hand opportunity to see and hear the witnesses testify. Id. Here, the trial court found that the father had neglected the child by failing to provide su…
-
Cyrill Siewert v. Casey, 80 So. 3d 1114 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…jury or a trial judge, to resolve conflicts in the evidence and to weigh the credibility of witnesses. Great deference is afforded the finder of fact because it has the first-hand opportunity to see and hear the witnesses testify. Ferry v. Abrams, 679 So. 2d 80, 81 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996). So long as competent, substantial evidence supports the trial court’s factual findings, we will not in essence offer a second trial on appeal by reweighing the evidence. Here, competent, substantial evidence supported the tr…
Previewing 3 of 12 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Turner v. Lorber, 360 So. 2d 101 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- State v. Cardosa, 609 So. 2d 152 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)