Berk v. Berk
This text of 272 So. 2d 859 (Berk v. Berk) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
By this interlocutory appeal, the appellant seeks review of an order denying a motion for garnishment after judgment and granting a motion to quash same.
The appellant has not favored us with the original judgment, the motion for garnishment or the motion to quash. Therefore, we have no alternative but to affirm the action of the trial judge here under review. Best v. Barnette, Fla.App.1961, 130 So.2d 90; Santona-Nervia Corporation v. Publix Market, Inc., Fla.App.1962, 146 So.2d 394; Curtiss-Wright Corporation v. King, Fla.App.1968, 207 So.2d 294; Jones v. First National Bank in Fort Lauderdale, Fla.App.1969, 226 So.2d 834; Rule 4.2, subd. d, F.A.R., 32 F.S.A.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
272 So. 2d 859, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/berk-v-berk-fladistctapp-1973.