Double Z, Inc. v. Rudolph T. Wagner, M.D.P.A.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Double Z, Inc. v. Rudolph T. Wagner, M.D.P.A.

576 So. 2d 913, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2562, 1991 WL 40068

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 26, 1991·No. No. 90-1345·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Double Z, Inc., appeals the denial of its motion for rehearing on a final judgment of foreclosure. We affirm.

Upon appellate review, the findings of a trial judge are presumed correct. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979); Anderman v. Miller, 359 So.2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). It is not the function of an appellate court to reweigh the evidence heard by the trial court. Froman v. Froman, 458 So.2d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).

Because we find that the evidence supports the trial court’s findings, and because justice is served, we affirm.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Double Z, Inc., appeals the denial of its motion for rehearing on a final judgment of foreclosure. We affirm.

Upon appellate review, the findings of a trial judge are presumed correct. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979); Anderman v. Miller, 359 So.2d 472 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). It is not the function of an appellate court to reweigh the evidence heard by the trial court. Froman v. Froman, 458 So.2d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984).

Because we find that the evidence supports the trial court’s findings, and because justice is served, we affirm.

Affirmed.

Double Z, Inc. v. Rudolph T. Wagner, M.D.P.A., 576 So. 2d 913, 1991 Fla. App. LEXIS 2562, 1991 WL 40068 (Fla. Ct. App. 1991).

Pincite

576 So. 2d 913 (Double Z, Inc. v. Rudolph T. Wagner, M.D.P.A.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related