Brant v. Brooks

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Brant v. Brooks

264 So. 2d 76, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6499

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 9, 1972

DocketNo. 71-718

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 264 So. 2d 76 (Brant v. Brooks) 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.

Bluebook

Brant v. Brooks, 264 So. 2d 76, 1972 Fla. App. LEXIS 6499 (Fla. Ct. App. 1972).

Pincite

Opinion

PIERCE, Chief Judge.

Appellant Brant appeals an adverse judgment in a suit for ejectment, entitling [77]*77appellee Brooks to the possession of the property involved and awarding certain damages.

Appellant did not include in the record on appeal appellee’s complaint, motion for summary judgment, attached affidavits, or the testimony or a stipulated statement of the evidence produced at the hearing on damages. This Court deferred action on appellee’s motion to quash the appeal until consideration of the appeal on the merits.

The record is insufficient to determine whether or not the trial Court committed error in entering the final judgment appealed. We, therefore, affirm the action of the trial Court. Castaldo v. Singapore, J. F. Inc., Fla.App.1972, 258 So.2d 499; Speight v. Dulimba, Fla.App.1968, 208 So.2d 833; Belfield v. Lochner, Fla.App.1964, 162 So.2d 668; Beyer v. Carey, Fla.1952, 61 So.2d 373.

Affirmed.

MANN and McNULTY, J., concur.

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