COLON BARLOW ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
WALLACE H. MCDONALD, 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 final judgment in partition, finding substantial evidence supported the judgment and other legal points lacked merit.
Appellants sought review of an adverse final judgment in partition rendered in favor of appellee. The trial court's findings were based on conflicting…
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 Presumption Of Correctness Of Trial Court Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellants seek review of an adverse final judgment in partition rendered in favor of appellee.
One of the principal questions preserved on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment. In our review of the record we have given due consideration to the applicable appellate principle that a judgment of the trial court reaches the appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness. Our examination of the record reveals that although the testimony is conflicting, and some of it subject to conflicting inferences, there is substantial evidence to support the findings made and conclusions reached by the trial court. 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.1
We have given careful consideration to the remaining legal questions raised by appellants concerning the applicability of the statute of frauds, the admissibility of certain evidence under the dead man’s statute, the legal sufficiency of the complaint and whether appellee failed to join the estate of appellants’ decedent as an indispensable party. We find as a matter of law that these points are without substantial merit. The judgment appealed is accordingly affirmed.
WIGGINTON, C. J., and CARROLL, DONALD K., J., and MANN, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Colon Barlow v. McDONALD, 237 So. 2d 180 (Fla. 1970)…Certiorari dismissed without opinion. 221 So. 2d 434.…
Authorities Cited
- OLD Equity Life Ins. Co. v. Franklyn Levenson, 177 So. 2d 50 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965)
- Stoller v. Jaffe, 125 So. 2d 310 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)