NORMAN F. SOLOMON, APPELLANT,
v.
JOHN HUNT ET UX., ET AL., APPELLEES
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Appellate Review Standards cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from an order holding that appellant was in contempt for his failure to comply with a prior order of the court. The order which is appealed further granted to appellant five days within which to comply with the prior order. The only point presented on this appeal urges that the appellant was not given an adequate notice of the hearing at which the second order was entered.
The appellant made no effort to present any defense to the appealed order during the five day grace period or thereafter. We think that under those circumstances the point claiming inadequacy of the notice of the hearing at which the appealed order was entered does not present prejudicial error. It is the duty of a party resorting to an appellate court to make the errors complained of clearly appear, if they in truth exist. Henry v. Spitler, 67 Fla. 146, 64 So. 745 (1914).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Strate v. Strate, 328 So. 2d 29 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…to meet this burden impels the conclusion that there is no error in the record and the judgment or order appealed must be affirmed. American Motor Inns of Fla., Inc. v. Bell Electric Co., Fla.App. 1972, 260 So. 2d 276; Solomon v. Hunt, Fla.App.1971, 243 So. 2d 185; Hamilton v. Liberty National Life Insurance Co., Fla.App.1968, 207 So. 2d 472; and see 2 Fla. Jur., Appeals § 316. We have considered the record, the numerous points in the briefs and arguments of counsel in the light of the controlling principles…
-
Emmett Reeder v. Edward M. Chadbourne, Inc., 338 So. 2d 271 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976)…were called for. Finally, even if the number of challenges allowed was in error it was harmless error. Judgments will not be reversed by reviewing courts unless prejudicial error is clearly demonstrated by the appellant, Soloman v. Hunt, Fla.App., 243 So. 2d 185 (1971). Only material errors which reasonably could have caused injustice are reversible errors. Appellant’s claimed bias in regard to the geographical location of the residences of members of the jury being primarily urban, while the appellant and…
-
The Yachting Arcade, Inc. v. Riverwalk Condo. Assoc. Inc., 500 So. 2d 202 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)…re unreviewable. Dubowitz v. Century Village East, Inc., 385 So. 2d 1116 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). Appellant claims these alleged procedural errors were fundamental, but fails to show how it was prejudiced by any such action or omission. Solomon v. Hunt, 243 So. 2d 185 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). On points 2 and 3, supra, appellant failed either to introduce evidence or to rebut testimony presented during the hearing regarding hazards to navigation posed by the proposed dock. Appellant argues that petitioners did not rai…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Henry v. Spitler, 67 Fla. 146 (Fla. 1914)