MCDANIEL GIFT SHOP, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
JACQUELINE L. W. BALFE ET AL., 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 First District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed a final judgment for delinquent rent against a defendant lessee. The court found substantial evidence supported the trial judge's factual findings and that the conclusions of law were not erroneous.
The court held that there was substantial evidence to support the trial judge's findings of fact and that the conclusions of law based on those facts were not erroneous. The court also found the cross-assignment of error to be without substantial merit.
“We find in the record substantial evidence to support the findings made by the trial judge, and are unable to agree that his conclusions of laiy based upon the facts found by him are erroneous.”
This quote establishes the appellate court's finding of sufficient evidence and lack of legal error in the trial court's decision.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involves an appeal by a defendant lessee from a non-jury action brought by the plaintiff lessors for delinquent rent. The pleadings raised di…
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 Conclusions Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
This appeal by defendant lessee is from a final judgment rendered in a non jury action for delinquent rent found to be due the plaintiff and cross-defendant lessors.
The issues raised by the pleadings filed in this proceeding involved disputed questions of fact, and mixed questions of both law and fact. We find in the record substantial evidence to support the findings made by the trial judge, and are unable to agree that his conclusions of laiy based upon the facts found by him are erroneous. We have carefully considered the cross-assignment of error filed by certain of the appellees but find it to be without substantial merit. The parties having failed to clearly demonstrate error, the judgment appealed is affirmed.
WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., and STUR-GIS and JOHNSON, JJ., concur..
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. Duckett, 40 Fla. Supp. 80 (Dade Cty. Cir. Ct. 1973)…ive assistace of court-appointed counsel. This court finds that the trial court committed prejudicial error in forcing the public defender to trial on the very day of appointment. French v. State, 161 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 1st Dist. 1964); Ross v. State, 181 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 3d Dist. 1966); Watson v. State, 169 So. 2d 887 (Fla. 3d Dist. 1964). As definitively stated by the Third District Court of Appeal in Watson, supra, on facts nearly identical to those at bar — “The right of a criminal defendant to be represen…
Authorities Cited
- McDANIEL Gift Shop, Inc. v. Balfe, 179 So. 2d 588 (Fla. 1st DCA 1965)