Baya v. Revitz

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Baya v. Revitz

281 So. 2d 521, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7701

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 31, 1973·No. No. 72-1042·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellants’ point urges that a judgment for partition must be reversed because a cotenant may not seek partition where there is an outstanding lease giving the present right of possession. The trial judge correctly determined that the outstanding lease was not a bar. See Leonard v. Browne, Fla.App.1961, 134 So.2d 872.

Appellee contends that a stipulation in the record of this case was a stipulation of settlement and that therefore the appellants cannot appeal the consent judgment. We agree. Our examination of the record convinces us that the stipulation was a settlement.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

PER CURIAM.

The appellants’ point urges that a judgment for partition must be reversed because a cotenant may not seek partition where there is an outstanding lease giving the present right of possession. The trial judge correctly determined that the outstanding lease was not a bar. See Leonard v. Browne, Fla.App.1961, 134 So.2d 872.

Appellee contends that a stipulation in the record of this case was a stipulation of settlement and that therefore the appellants cannot appeal the consent judgment. We agree. Our examination of the record convinces us that the stipulation was a settlement.

Affirmed.

Baya v. Revitz, 281 So. 2d 521, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7701 (Fla. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

281 So. 2d 521 (Baya v. Revitz) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related