TRANSPORTES AEREOS BENIANOS, S. A. (TABSA), ALSO KNOWN AS BOLIVIAN AIRWAYS, A BOLIVIAN CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
W. W. TILTON, 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 Third District Court of Appeal of Florida affirmed a trial court's judgment against the plaintiff, Transportes Aereos Benianos, S. A. (Tabsa), finding no reversible error in the trial court's determination that Tabsa failed to prove its case by a preponderance of the evidence and that the action was not properly instituted.
No, the appellate court found no reversible error in the trial court's findings and affirmed the judgment.
“That plaintiff has failed to prove its case by a preponderance of evidence.”
The trial court's finding that the plaintiff did not meet its burden of proof.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceTransportes Aereos Benianos, S. A. (Tabsa), the plaintiff in the trial court, sought to enforce a statutory lien. After a non-jury trial, the court fo…
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 Preponderance Of The Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
The appellant, Transportes Aereos, Beni-anos, S. A., was the plaintiff in the trial court. Its complaint sought to enforce a statutory lien. After a non-jury trial the court found:
* * * * * *
“1. That plaintiff has failed to prove its case by a preponderance of evidence.
2. That plaintiff’s complaint does not lie in the kind of action instituted”
and entered judgment for the defendant.
Appellant’s first point is essentially an attack on the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment. No error has been demonstrated under this point. See, e. g., Boulevard Nat. Bank of Miami v. Gulf Am. Land Corp., Fla.App.1968, 212 So.2d 17, 20.
Appellant’s second point is a contention that the court should have granted part of its claim because the appellee admitted partial liability. This contention is not supported by the record.
The appellant has not shown reversible error. We therefore affirm the judgment appealed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Boulevard Nat'l Bank OF Miami v. Gulf Am. Land Corp., 212 So. 2d 17 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)