CARR QUALITY JEWELERS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, NORMAN N. CARR AND MARGARET ANN CARR, HIS WIFE, APPELLANTS,
v.
THOMAS M. COKER, JR., JOHN T. CARLON, JR., AND THEODORE P. SOBO D/B/A COKER, CARLON & SOBO, 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 appellate court affirmed a lower court's judgment awarding attorney's fees, finding that the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law were supported by competent substantial evidence and were not clearly erroneous.
No, the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law were not clearly erroneous. They were supported by competent substantial evidence.
“It is a well established rule of law that the trial court's findings of fact and conclusions of law come to the appellate court with a presumption of correctness and will not be disturbed unless they are clearly erroneous.”
This quote establishes the legal standard of review applied by the appellate court.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe defendants, who were the clients, appealed a final judgment entered after a non-jury trial. The lawsuit was for attorney's fees based on an attorn…
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 Suit For Attorney'S Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
The defendants (appellants) appeal from a final judgment entered pursuant to a non-jury trial in favor of the plaintiffs (appel-lees) involving a suit for attorney’s fees arising from an attorney-client contract.
The primary thrust of defendants’ appeal deals with the correctness of the lower court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law in construing the contract.
It is a well established rule of law that the trial court’s findings of fact and ■conclusions of law come to the appellate court with a presumption of correctness and will not be disturbed unless they are clearly erroneous. Pokress v. Josephart, Fla.App. 1963, 152 So.2d 756; Bittner v. Walsh, Fla. App.1961, 132 So.2d 799; Clausi v. Casner Motors, Fla.App. 1959, 112 So.2d 587.
The court having had the benefit ■of oral argument and having considered the same, carefully examined and considered the record on appeal, the briefs and the points raised, finds that there is competent substantial evidence to support the findings of fact and the conclusions of law of the trial judge and that the appellants have failed to overcome the presumption of correctness of the trial court’s findings.
Accordingly, the final judgment appealed is affirmed.
Affirmed.
ANDREWS and CROSS, JJ., and LEAVENGOOD, C. RICHARD, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
David S. Kaufman, P.A. v. Moskowitz, 610 So. 2d 642 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)…re, we reverse the final judgment under review and find no merit in the cross appeal as to the jury award on attorney’s fees. Graham v. Knap, 209 So. 2d 708 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied 214 So. 2d 621 (Fla.1968); Carr Quality Jewelers, Inc. v. Coker, 201 So. 2d 798 (Fla. 4th DCA1967). The final judgment under review is reversed with directions to the trial court to enter judgment for Kaufman on the plaintiff’s claim and to enter judgment of $1,300 for Kaufman on his counterclaim. Reversed and remanded with d…
Authorities Cited
- Bittner v. Walsh, 132 So. 2d 799 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)
- Clausi v. Casner Motors, Inc., 112 So. 2d 587 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959)
- Pokress v. Josephart, 152 So. 2d 756 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963)