RAYMOND J. GEIGER AND HIS WIFE, LEONORA V. GEIGER, APPELLANTS,
v.
CITY OF LEESBURG, A MUNICIPAL CORPORATION, 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.
The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment because the appellant failed to provide the necessary record for review of the partial summary judgment.
Appellants, plaintiffs below, appealed a final judgment entered upon a jury verdict, contending that a partial summary judgment entered by the trial c…
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 Appellate Record Requirements cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a final judgment entered upon a jury verdict in favor of the appellee-defendant.
*261The appellants, plaintiffs below, contend that the entry of the trial court’s partial summary judgment which was based on the pleadings, depositions, admissions, interrogatories and affidavits filed herein created reversible error.
The record on appeal contains no depositions, admissions, interrogatories or affidavits. We therefore are precluded from reviewing the correctness of the partial summary judgment entered below. The well-established rule of law is succinctly found in the case of Broward County Port Authority for Use and Benefit of Cappelen v. F. M. Rule & Company, Fla.App. 1960, 119 So.2d 82, wherein it is stated:
“ * * * When resort to an appellate court is pursued, it thereupon becomes the duty of the appellant or his counsel to make the errors complained of clearly to appear through availing the court of a proper record of all the facts and circumstances pertinent to and connected with the asserted errors. Hoodless v. Jernigan, 1906, 51 Fla. 211, 41 So. 194. Where an appellant’s points require a consideration of a record considered by the trial court and upon which the trial court based its decision, but such record is not brought before the appellate court through the appeal record, the contentions cannot be decided by the appellate court. See Greene v. Hoiriis, Fla.App.1959, 103 So.2d 226. See also Meadows Southern Construction Co. v. Pezzaniti, Fla.App. 1959, 108 So.2d 499.”
The other assignments of error have carefully been considered and are to be found without merit.
The final judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
LILES, Acting C. J., and PIERCE,- J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson v. Granger Lumber Co., Inc., 275 So. 2d 555 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973)…ompany, 119 So. 2d 82 (Fla.App.1960); Lewis v. Powell, 203 So. 2d 504 (Fla.App.1967); Sun Plastics, Inc. v. International Identifiers, Inc., 213 So. 2d 258 (Fla.App.1968); Greene v. Hoiriis, 103 So. 2d 226 (Fla.App.1958); Geiger v. City of Leesburg, 186 So. 2d 260 (Fla.App.1966); Wilder v. Altman, 179 So. 2d 250 (Fla.App.1965); Anderson v. Peoples First National Bank of Miami Shores, 220 So. 2d 667 (Fla.App.1969); United States v. Dahlberg, 115 So. 2d 86 (Fla.App.1959). During the pendency of this appeal, it…
-
SUN Plastics, Inc. v. Int'l Identifiers, Inc., 213 So. 2d 258 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)…of depositions to determine whether there was an issue of fact presented to the trial judge when it appears that such depositions are not included in the record transmitted to the appellate court. See also: Geiger v. City of Leesburg, Fla.App.1966, 186 So. 2d 260. No reversible error having been made to appear, the judgment appealed is affirmed. Affirmed.…
-
Certain-Teed Prods. Corp. v. Frazier, 203 So. 2d 503 (Fla. 2d DCA 1967)…rted to so much during the process of the appeal, are not contained in the record. We are, therefore, precluded from reviewing the correctness of the summary decree entered below. This court, in the case of Geiger v. City of Leesburg, Fla.App.1966, 186 So. 2d 260, relied on an opinion written by the late Judge Kanner and said: “ * * * The well-established rule of law is succinctly found in the case of Broward County Port Authority for Use and Benefit of Cappelen v. F. M. Rule & Company, Fla. App. 1960, 119…
Previewing 3 of 4 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)
- Hoodless v. Jernigan, 51 Fla. 211 (Fla. 1906)
- Broward Cnty. Port Auth. v. F. M. Rule & Co., 119 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 2d DCA 1960)
- Meadows S. Constr. Co. v. Pezzaniti, 108 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)