HENRY G. BURKE, MORRIS POSNER AND VICTOR POSNER, AS TRUSTEES UNDER A TRUST INDENTURE, APPELLANTS,
v.
HAROLD VINEBERG AND COLISEUM LANES, INC., A 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.
This case involves an appeal from a final decree concerning a lease and supplemental agreement. The appellate court reviewed the chancellor's findings regarding a credit for one appellee, the return of bowling pins to the appellants, and ownership of billiard tables, ultimately affirming the decree.
Yes, the evidence supports the chancellor's findings on all three disputed points.
“The plaintiffs, assignees of the lessor, appeal a final decree in a suit for an accounting and for the return of specified property.”
Describes the nature of the appeal and the relief sought in the lower court.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe plaintiffs, assignees of a lessor, appealed a final decree that addressed a suit for an accounting and property return related to a lease and a su…
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 Title To Real Property cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiffs, assignees of the lessor, appeal a final decree in a suit for an accounting and for the return of specified property. The relief was sought upon a lease with Congress Lanes, Inc., and an agreement with appellee, Vineberg, supplemental to the lease. Coliseum Lanes, Inc., appellee, counterclaimed, asserting title to three billiard tables in the possession of the appellant. The decree found, in the portions relevant to this appeal, that: (1) Vineberg, appellee, was entitled to a $3,000 credit; (2) the appellants were not entitled to the return of 110 sets of bowling pins; and (3) Coliseum Lanes, Inc. is the owner of the three billiard tables. In the main, the decree was favorable to the appellants, but in these three particulars it was not. On this appeal, the points presented urge that the evidence does not support the three findings specified.
Our review of the record leads us to the conclusion that there is evidence to support the findings of the chancellor. Therefore, we affirm the decree upon the principle set forth in Sottile v. Mershon, Fla.App.1964, 166 So.2d 481, 483, and cases cited therein.
Affirmed.