David v. Peninsular Building Supply Co.
481 So. 2d 511, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 70, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 6018
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 27, 1985·No. No. 84-1621·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The most important question argued on this appeal is whether appellant stipulated for the case to be tried nonjury. However, despite an apparent misunderstanding on the part of the judge, our examination of the record reflects that appellant never made demand for a jury trial on his defenses to the lien foreclosure or on his counterclaim. Consequently, appellant’s reliance upon Hightower v. Bigoney, 156 So.2d 501 (Fla.1963), is misplaced.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
David v. Peninsular Building Supply Co., 481 So. 2d 511, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 70, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 6018 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).
481 So. 2d 511 (David v. Peninsular Building Supply Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Ins. Co. v. Julien P. Benjamin Equip. Co.
481 So. 2d 511 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)