J. MARQUETTE PHILLIPS, APPELLANT,
v.
EDNA K. BLUM, FORMERLY KNOWN AS EDNA K. LEVINE, AND TACO BAY COMPANY (A DISSOLVED FLORIDA CORPORATION), APPELLEES
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 court held that while the final decree is affirmed, the costs of the receivership should not have been taxed against the appellant.
Appellant sought review of a final decree awarding a money judgment and taxing receivership costs against him. The record on appeal was incomplete, an…
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 Jury Trial cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant seeks review of an adverse final decree awarding the individual appel-lee a money decree and taxing the costs of a receivership against him.
The record on appeal fails to include the entire testimony adduced before the chancellor in extensive hearings and, therefore, all findings of fact must be affirmed. If an appellant desires review of findings of fact, it is incumbent upon him to bring to the appellate forum the entire record which was before the chancellor. Green v. Hoiriis, Fla.App.1958, 103 So.2d 226; F.A.R. 3.6(b), (d) (1), 31 F.S.A.
The costs of the receivership should not have been taxed against the appellant. He was not responsible for the activity which resulted in the appointment of the receiver. In fact, the appointment was made upon an unverified complaint and motion, without notice to the appellant, a practice which we do not here approve. The appellant not being responsible for the activities resulting in the appointment of the receiver, it was an error for the chancellor to tax the costs of the receivership against him.
The appellant has raised other questions pertaining to the failure of the chancellor to transfer the cause to law, in order that he might have had a jury trial. The record does not reveal that the appellant, in fact, timely raised these objections. Although it appears that even if the requested transfer could be considered as being appropriately made initially, it was subsequently waived by appellant’s own actions in joining in the motion for final hearing, in failing to call to the attention of the court that he desired a jury trial prior to the final hearing, and in failing to file a motion to transfer. Kingston v. Quimby, Fla.1955, 80 So.2d 455.
Therefore, the final decree appealed from is affirmed with directions to eliminate therefrom that portion awarding receiver’s costs.
Affirmed with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dade Cnty. Bd. OF Pub. Instruction & the Cont'l Ins. Co. v. Foster, 307 So. 2d 502 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)…n the record on appeal. We therefore affirm. It is incumbent for the appellant, under Florida Appellate Rules, to bring the record to the court sufficient to demonstrate error. See: Rules 3.6, subds. b, d(l), F.A.R.; Phillips v. Blum, Fla.App.1963, 139 So. 2d 459. It has many times been held that where a trial court makes a determination of fact this issue may not be reviewed when the evidence is not presented in the record on appeal. See: Phillips v. Blum, supra; Stuco Corp. v. Gates, Fla.App.1967, 145 So.…
-
Althouse v. State Farm Fire & Cas. Co., 183 So. 2d 859 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)…error is not in the record before it. Buckalew v. Buckalew, Fla.App.1959, 115 So. 2d 564. Where the record on appeal fails to include the entire testimony before the chancellor, all findings of fact must be affirmed. Phillips v. Blum, Fla.App.1962, 139 So. 2d 459. It is elementary that an order or decree appealed from comes to this Court clothed with the presumption of correctness, and that the burden is always upon the appellant to successfully demonstrate to the appellate Court that the decisive action of…
-
Gallion v. Belk, 180 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)…in view of the purpose for which the original loan was made. The appellant has not presented the entire record on this appeal and we are therefore compelled to presume that any finding of fact made by the lower court is correct. Phillips v. Blum, 139 So. 2d 459 (3rd DCA, Fla.1962), Pan American Metal Products [*351] Co. Inc. v. Healy, 138 So. 2d 96 (3rd DCA, Fla.). The order appealed is therefore affirmed. RAWLS, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., J., concur.…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- NIX v. Lake W. Koontz, 103 So. 2d 226 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958)
- Kingston v. Quimby, 80 So. 2d 455 (Fla. 1955)