LAFRANCE CLEANERS & DYERS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
CARMEN ARGENIO, 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.
LaFrance Cleaners appeals a $500 judgment for negligent carpet cleaning. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the trial judge's findings of fact in this bench trial were supported by substantial evidence and within the proper range for damages.
The trial court's judgment was affirmed. The trial judge's findings of fact are entitled to the same weight as a jury verdict and will not be disturbed if supported by substantial evidence. The evidence was sufficient to support the finding that the rugs were damaged by negligent cleaning, and the $500 damages award was within the range of evidence presented and substantially less than the $1,122 claimed.
“findings of fact of a trial judge in a case tried without a jury are entitled to the same weight on appeal as the verdict of a jury and will not be disturbed unless it is shown that there is a lack of substantial evidence to support his conclusions”
Establishes the standard of review for bench trial findings 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 intelligenceLaFrance Cleaners undertook to clean off-white carpets in appellee Carmen Argenio's home. The appellate court found evidence supported the trial judge…
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 Presumption Of Correctness cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal by the defendant from an adverse judgment for $500 rendered in the civil court of record of Dade County in a non-jury case.
Appellant undertook to clean certain portions of off-white carpets in the home of the appellee. The action was for damages alleged by the appellee to have resulted from negligent cleaning of the carpets by the appellant’s employee.
Appellant contends that negligence was not proved, and that if the plaintiff was entitled to recover there was no basis in the record for a judgment in the amount of $500. We have considered those contentions in the light of the record and briefs and conclude they are without merit.
As pointed out in appellee’s brief, findings of fact of a trial judge in a case tried without a jury are entitled to the same weight on appeal as the verdict of a jury and will not be disturbed unless it is shown that there is a lack of substantial evidence to support his conclusions1; and the judgment comes to this court with a presumption of correctness.2 Although the evidence was not without conflict, the trial judge, acting as a jury was entitled to find that the rugs were damaged and that such damage was the result of negligence.
As to damages, the plaintiff sought $1,122 which included $50 paid for the cleaning. The trial judge, in awarding damages, was not required to grant the amount demanded by the plaintiff. There was evidence of the cost of the carpets, their condition after cleaning, and of their value prior to and after the cleaning. The damages allowed by the trial judge were substantially less than the sum claimed, and the award was within the range of evidence. No error having been made to appear, the judgment should be and hereby is
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (11 total)
-
OLD Equity Life Ins. Co. v. Franklyn Levenson, 177 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)…appellate court not disturb the final judgment if there is any substantial, competent evidence to support same. See: Ross v. Florida Sun Life Insurance Company, Fla.App.1960, 124 So. 2d 892; LaFrance Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. Argenio, Fla.App.1962, 147 So. 2d 330. It is not the function of this or any other appellate court to substitute its judgment for the trier of fact, be it a jury or a trial judge, and although we might have reached a different conclusion if we had been the initial arbitrator of the fac…
-
Best Concrete Corp. v. Oswalt Eng'g Serv. Corp., 188 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)…iged to affirm. Cohen v. Mohawk, Inc., Fla.1962, 137 So. 2d 222. Also, where there is substantial competent evidence to support a fact trier’s findings, his conclusions will not be disturbed. LaFrance Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. Argenio, Fla.App.1962, 147 So. 2d 330; Lowery v. Rosenberg, Fla.App.1962, 147 So. 2d 321. Generally, the determination of the existence of an accord and satisfaction is for the fact finder. In the case of United States Rubber Products v. Clark, 1941, 145 Fla. 631, 200 So. 385, 389, it…
-
Highland Lakes, Inc. v. ART Present Real Est., Inc., 147 So. 2d 348 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)…pon a non-jury trial are entitled to the same weight as a jury verdict. MacGregor v. Sachs, Fla.1952, 57 So. 2d 426; Bardee Corp. v. Arnold Altex Aluminum Co., Fla.App. 1961, 134 So. 2d 268; La-France Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. Argenio, Fla.App.1962, 147 So. 2d 330. Therefore, we will not reverse unless it is made to clearly appear that the judgment of the-trial judge is erroneous or where his findings are manifestly against the weight of evidence or are contrary to the legal effect of the evidence. See Talbot…
Previewing 3 of 11 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- First Atl. Nat'l Bank OF Daytona Beach v. Olive S. Cobbett, 82 So. 2d 870 (Fla. 1955)
- Am. Cont'l Inv., Inc. v. Borofsky, 87 So. 2d 419 (Fla. 1956)
- Martin v. Green, 134 So. 2d 268 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961)
- Johnson v. Roberts, 79 So. 2d 425 (Fla. 1955)
- State v. Town OF Sweetwater, 112 So. 2d 852 (Fla. 1959)
- Cravero Home Bldg. Co., Inc. v. Jaffe, 142 So. 2d 342 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)