Cordoves v. Cordoves

105 So. 3d 591, 2012 WL 6682017, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21987
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 26, 2012
DocketNo. 3D11-2492
StatusPublished

This text of 105 So. 3d 591 (Cordoves v. Cordoves) 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
Cordoves v. Cordoves, 105 So. 3d 591, 2012 WL 6682017, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21987 (Fla. Ct. App. 2012).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979)(“When there are issues of fact the appellant necessarily asks the reviewing court to draw conclusions about the evidence. Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court cannot properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court’s judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”); see also Fla. R.App. P. 9.200(b)(4) (2012) (providing a method for preparing a statement of the evidence and proceedings when a transcript is unavailable).

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

Related

Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee
377 So. 2d 1150 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
105 So. 3d 591, 2012 WL 6682017, 2012 Fla. App. LEXIS 21987, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/cordoves-v-cordoves-fladistctapp-2012.