SAM SILVER, APPELLANT,
v.
ERNEST H. WILSON AND BESSIE B. WILSON, HIS WIFE, APPELLEES

Fla. 1st DCA | 1969-04-08
No. K-78
WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur.
221 So. 2d 201 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1969) Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases

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.


Holding

The appellate court affirmed the trial court's judgment, finding substantial evidence supported the conclusion that the deed was not intended to convey title.


Facts & Procedural History

Appellant sought review of a judgment cancelling a deed that purported to convey an undivided interest in land. The trial court found it was not the i…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of an adverse final judgment cancelling and holding for naught a recorded deed executed by appel-lees purporting to convey to appellant an undivided one-half interest in certain lands lying in St. Johns County. The principal question preserved on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment.

In our review of the issues presented for decision we have given due consideration to the applicable principle that a judgment of the trial court reaches the appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness. The record reveals substantial evidence to support the findings made and conclusions reached by the trial court in which it held that it was not the intention of any of the parties that the deed in question convey title of any portion of the lands described therein to appellant.1

It is not the province of this court to substitute its judgment for that of the trier of the facts. These findings will not be disturbed in the absence of a clear showing that the trial court committed error or that the evidence demonstrates that the conclusions reached are erroneous.2 The judgment appealed is accordingly affirmed.

WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., and RAWLS, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By

  • …nterclaim. The assignments of error directed to this single point urge that the evidence does not support the trial judge’s judgment. Our [*165] review of the record convinces ns that error has not been demonstrated. Silver v. Wilson, Fla.App.1969, 221 So. 2d 201. Affirmed.…
  • Frieda Rosenthal v. Simonhoff, 342 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
    …plat in all critical instances. Upon examining the record, we find that the conclusions of the trial court are supported by substantial competent evidence. In such a case, we will not disturb the findings of the trier of fact. See Silver v. Wilson, 221 So. 2d 201 (Fla. 1st DCA 1969). Affirmed.…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw