JULIUS GREEN, APPELLANT,
v.
HARRY ZUKERNICK, APPELLEE

Fla. 3d DCA | 1961-10-09
No. 60-666
Before PEARSON, TILLMAN, C. J., and HORTON and HENDRY, TJ.
133 So. 2d 442 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1961) Positive Treatment
Cited by 14 cases

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.

Synopsis

The appellate court affirmed a lower court's decision dismissing a malpractice and breach of fiduciary duty lawsuit filed by a former client against an attorney. The court found sufficient evidence supported the chancellor's findings.


Holding

Yes, the court found substantial evidence supported the chancellor's findings against the former client.


Key Quotes

“We have carefully considered the evidence and proofs submitted before the chancellor and are of the view that the findings made and the conclusions reached are not against the manifest weight of the evidence.”

This quote establishes the appellate court's standard of review and its conclusion regarding the evidence.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

A former client sued an attorney for malpractice and breach of fiduciary relationship, seeking an accounting and a money judgment. The case was heard …

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

The appellee, an attorney, was sued by a former client for malpractice and breach of fiduciary relationship. The action was in chancery and sought certain equitable relief, including an accounting and a money judgment.

After hearing testimony and considering certain documentary proofs, the chancellor found against the appellant and rendered a decree dismissing the complaint with prejudice.

The appellant contends here that there was substantial evidence to support the allegations of the complaint. We have carefully considered the evidence and proofs submitted before the chancellor and are of the view that the findings made and the conclusions reached are not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Conversely, there is sufficient evidence to support the chancellor’s findings, and the decree should be affirmed.

Affirmed.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • Hopkins v. Lockheed Aircraft Corp., 201 So. 2d 743 (Fla. 1967)
    …kwith v. Bailey, 1935, 119 Fla. 316, 161 So. 576; and Kellog-Citizens National Bank of Green Bay v. Felton, 1940, 145 Fla. 68, 199 So. 50. Accord: Tsilidis v. Pedakis, Fla.App.1961, 132 So. 2d 9; Allen v. Universal C.I.T. Credit Corp., Fla.App.1961, 133 So. 2d 442; Neal v. State ex rel. Neal, Fla.App.1961, 135 So. 2d 891. This aspect of judicial comity — of which the rule of lex loci delicti in tort cases is necessarily a subservient part — was stated in the Hartford Accident & Indemnity Co. case, supra, 130…
  • Trumbull Chevrolet Sales Co., Inc. v. Seawright, 134 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)
    …ner. To accomplish this, certain duties and limitations have been placed on the purchaser as well as the seller, and courts generally require strict compliance therewith. Thus, in the un'reported case of Allen v. Universal C.I.T. Credit Corporation, 133 So. 2d 442 (being case No. C-108 of the serial numbers of this court, opinion filed September 12, 1961), this court, speaking through Carroll, C. J., in passing on a purported sales contract executed in the state of Missouri, held that under the law of that st…
  • Seiff v. Presto Brick Mach. Corp., 168 So. 2d 700 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)
    …he time of the distraint sale. With no right of possession, there could have been no conversion. See: Dekle v. Calhoun, 60 Fla. 53, 53 So. 14; Fletcher v. Dees, 101 Fla. 402, 134 So. 234; Allen v. Universal C. I. T. Credit Corporation, Fla.App.1961, 133 So. 2d 442. It is also doubtful whether the plaintiffs were entitled to an equitable lien on the chattel subsequent to the distraint sale, but this point was not preserved for review by a cross assignment €>f error. [*701] The final decree arrived in this cour…

Previewing 3 of 7 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw