Hennington v. Cunningham

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hennington v. Cunningham

452 So. 2d 997, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13899

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 19, 1984

DocketNo. 83-2812

StatusPublished

This text of 452 So. 2d 997 (Hennington v. Cunningham) 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

Hennington v. Cunningham, 452 So. 2d 997, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13899 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The trial court's finding of an implied grant of easement will not be disturbed because it is supported by competent and substantial evidence. See Laufer v. Norma Fashions, Inc., 418 So.2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We remand, however, with instructions to amend the final judgment to include a legal description of the easement. See Roy v. Euro-Holland Vastgoed, B.V., 404 So.2d 410 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

Affirmed and remanded with instructions.

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

PER CURIAM.

The trial court's finding of an implied grant of easement will not be disturbed because it is supported by competent and substantial evidence. See Laufer v. Norma Fashions, Inc., 418 So.2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982). We remand, however, with instructions to amend the final judgment to include a legal description of the easement. See Roy v. Euro-Holland Vastgoed, B.V., 404 So.2d 410 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981).

Affirmed and remanded with instructions.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

452 So. 2d 997, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 13899, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hennington-v-cunningham-fladistctapp-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack