Harbor Yacht Repair, Inc. v. Sanger

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Harbor Yacht Repair, Inc. v. Sanger

279 So. 2d 64, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7920

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 19, 1973

DocketNo. 72-1451

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 279 So. 2d 64 (Harbor Yacht Repair, Inc. v. Sanger) 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

Harbor Yacht Repair, Inc. v. Sanger, 279 So. 2d 64, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7920 (Fla. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The appellant brought an action m replev-in to recover possession of an automobile. The appellee claimed that the automobile was delivered to him as security for a loan which had not been repaid. The trial court found after a trial without jury that the appellee was entitled to possession under the agreement of the parties.

On this appeal, the appeuant urges that because title to the automobile had not passed to the appellee, the appellant should have been awarded possession of the security. The findings of the trial court arrive in an appellate court clothed in a presumption of correctness and an appellate court will not reverse such findings when they are supported by competent evidence. See City of Miami Beach v. Fein, Fla.App.1972, 263 So.2d 258. The findings before us on this appeal were made upon conflicting evidence and there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the trial court’s finding that the parties agreed that the appellee was to have possession of the security until the loan was repaid.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellant brought an action m replev-in to recover possession of an automobile. The appellee claimed that the automobile was delivered to him as security for a loan which had not been repaid. The trial court found after a trial without jury that the appellee was entitled to possession under the agreement of the parties.

On this appeal, the appeuant urges that because title to the automobile had not passed to the appellee, the appellant should have been awarded possession of the security. The findings of the trial court arrive in an appellate court clothed in a presumption of correctness and an appellate court will not reverse such findings when they are supported by competent evidence. See City of Miami Beach v. Fein, Fla.App.1972, 263 So.2d 258. The findings before us on this appeal were made upon conflicting evidence and there is sufficient evidence in the record to support the trial court’s finding that the parties agreed that the appellee was to have possession of the security until the loan was repaid.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

279 So. 2d 64, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7920, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/harbor-yacht-repair-inc-v-sanger-fladistctapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack