GENERAL IMPACT GLASS & WINDOWS, CORP.,
v.
THE HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY, ET AL. ,
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.
A trial court's determination that the party with the burden of proof has failed to meet that burden will not be overturned on appeal where it is supported by competent, substantial evidence.
[1] A trial court's finding that the party bearing the burden of proof failed to satisfy that burden will not be reversed on appeal if supported by competent, substantial evi…
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 intelligenceGeneral Impact Glass & Windows, Corp. appealed a county court judgment in an insurance dispute against The Hanover Insurance Company.…
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 Standard Of Appellate Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed March 24, 2021. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-47 Lower Tribunal Nos. 19-209 AP; 12-28206 CC ________________
General Impact Glass & Windows, Corp., Appellant,
vs.
The Hanover Insurance Company, et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the County Court for Miami-Dade County, Robert T. Watson, Judge.
Daniels, Rodriguez, Berkeley, Daniels & Cruz, P.A., and Jorge L. Cruz, Justin S. Miller and William O. Diab, for appellant.
Smith, Currie & Hancock LLP, Christopher M. Horton and Brian A. Wolf (Fort Lauderdale), for appellee, The Hanover Insurance Company.
Before FERNANDEZ, LINDSEY and GORDO, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2
A trial court’s determination that the party with the burden of proof has failed to meet that burden will not be overturned on appeal where it is supported by competent, substantial evidence. See, e.g., Tylinski v. Klein Auto., Inc., 90 So. 3d 870, 873 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Alba G. Tylinski and Cecilia M. Tylinski v. Klein Auto., Inc., 90 So. 3d 870 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012)