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

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 26, 1991

DocketNo. 90-1345

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 576 So. 2d 913 (Double Z, Inc. v. Rudolph T. Wagner, M.D.P.A.) 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

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

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