RICHARD I. MERCIER, APPELLANT,
v.
MURIEL MAY MERCIER, 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 a divorce decree, finding no clear error in the chancellor's factual findings despite the appellant's contentions. The court emphasized the chancellor's role as the trier of fact and the presumption of correctness afforded to their findings.
No, the chancellor's findings of fact were not clearly erroneous. The appellate court found no error in the chancellor's determination of the facts.
“As the trier of fact, the chancellor has the responsibility of determining the weight, credibility and sufficiency of the evidence.”
This quote establishes the role and authority of the chancellor in evaluating evidence.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant, who was the defendant in the lower court, appealed a final divorce decree granted to the appellee, the plaintiff below. The appellant a…
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 Review Of Factual Findings cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellant, defendant below, appeals from a final decree granting a divorce to ap-pellee, plaintiff below.
Appellant contends that the findings of fact made by the chancellor are clearly erroneous and manifestly against the weight and effect of the evidence. *205We have carefully examined the very extensive record here presented and find no error committed by the chancellor. As the trier of fact, the chancellor has the responsibility of determining the weight, credibility and sufficiency of the evidence. These findings are clothed with a presumption of correctness. Clutter v. Clutter, 171 So.2d 544, 545 (D.C.A.Fla.1965); Sharp v. Sharp, 185 So.2d 508 (D.C.A.Fla.1966). No abuse of discretion having been shown, this presumption has not been overcome in the instant case. For this reason, the decree is affirmed.
LILES, Acting C. J., PIERCE, J., and OVERSTREET, MURRAY W., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fatolitis v. Fatolitis, 273 So. 2d 86 (Fla. 2d DCA 1973)…The judgment of a lower court comes here with a presumption of correctness, and the burden is on the appellant to establish reversible error. Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Baynard, Fla.1933, 112 Fla. 544, 151 So. 5; Mercier v. Mercier, Fla.App.1967, 200 So. 2d 204; Fishman v. Fishman, Fla.App.1971, 245 So. 2d 258. Upon careful consideration of the record on appeal and briefs of the parties, we find that the appellant has been unable to carry this burden. Affirmed. HOBSON, A. C. J., McNULTY, J., and PIERCE,…
-
Mercier v. Mercier, 204 So. 2d 329 (Fla. 1967)…Certiorari denied without opinion. 200 So. 2d 204.…
-
Joao (John) Barbosa v. Leonore Barbosa, 249 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…cond mortgage. Our review of the record convinces us that the evidence is sufficient to sustain the claim of the appellee to a special equity in the home property, Gregory v. Gregory, Fla.App. 1968, 208 So. 2d 483; Mercier v. Mercier, Fla.App.1967, 200 So. 2d 204. We think that this decision of the trial judge is reinforced by the fact that the award of the home to the wife may be considered in the nature of an additional alimony inasmuch as it is the natural home for the appellee and the minor child. We fin…
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
- Clutter v. Clutter, 171 So. 2d 544 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Sharp v. Sharp, 185 So. 2d 508 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)