Gadsden State Bank v. Department of Banking

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gadsden State Bank v. Department of Banking

369 So. 2d 375, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14398

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 27, 1979

DocketNo. JJ-392

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 369 So. 2d 375 (Gadsden State Bank v. Department of Banking) 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

Gadsden State Bank v. Department of Banking, 369 So. 2d 375, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14398 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Gadsden State Bank alleges that the hearing officer committed error in admitting certain evidence. However, after consideration of the briefs and the record on appeal, appellant has failed to demonstrate that the “fairness of the proceedings or the correctness of the action may have been impaired by a material error in procedure or a failure to follow prescribed procedure” or that the “agency’s action depends on any finding of fact that is not supported by competent substantial evidence in the record.” § 120.68(8) and (10) Fla.Stat. (1977). Appellant’s remaining point is without merit. Accordingly, the order of the agency is AFFIRMED.

MILLS, Acting C. J., ERVIN, J. and MASON, ERNEST E., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Gadsden State Bank alleges that the hearing officer committed error in admitting certain evidence. However, after consideration of the briefs and the record on appeal, appellant has failed to demonstrate that the “fairness of the proceedings or the correctness of the action may have been impaired by a material error in procedure or a failure to follow prescribed procedure” or that the “agency’s action depends on any finding of fact that is not supported by competent substantial evidence in the record.” § 120.68(8) and (10) Fla.Stat. (1977). Appellant’s remaining point is without merit. Accordingly, the order of the agency is AFFIRMED.

MILLS, Acting C. J., ERVIN, J. and MASON, ERNEST E., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

369 So. 2d 375, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14398, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gadsden-state-bank-v-department-of-banking-fladistctapp-1979.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack