Highland Lakes, Inc. v. Art Present Real Estate, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Highland Lakes, Inc. v. Art Present Real Estate, Inc.

147 So. 2d 348

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 20, 1962

DocketNo. 62-209

StatusPublished

Cited by12 cases

This text of 147 So. 2d 348 (Highland Lakes, Inc. v. Art Present Real Estate, Inc.) 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

Highland Lakes, Inc. v. Art Present Real Estate, Inc., 147 So. 2d 348 (Fla. Ct. App. 1962).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Highland Lakes, Inc., was the defendant in an action brought by Art Present Real Estate, Inc., for a real estate commission. The trial judge found for the broker after a non-jury trial and the seller appeals. The sole question presented is whether there is sufficient evidence to support the finding upon the issue of whether the broker was the efficient procuring cause of the sale which was consummated.

The findings of fact of a trial judge upon a non-jury trial are entitled to the same weight as a jury verdict. MacGregor v. Sachs, Fla.1952, 57 So.2d 426; Bardee Corp. v. Arnold Altex Aluminum Co., Fla.App. 1961, 134 So.2d 268; La-France Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. Argenio, Fla.App.1962, 147 So.2d 330. Therefore, we will not reverse unless it is made to clearly appear that the judgment of the-trial judge is erroneous or where his findings are manifestly against the weight of evidence or are contrary to the legal effect of the evidence. See Talbot v. Talbot, Fla. App.1958, 104 So.2d 410.

The appellant has not carried the burden-of demonstrating such error. We, therefore, affirm. See Norwood v. Davis, 158 Fla. 352, 28 So.2d 872.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Highland Lakes, Inc., was the defendant in an action brought by Art Present Real Estate, Inc., for a real estate commission. The trial judge found for the broker after a non-jury trial and the seller appeals. The sole question presented is whether there is sufficient evidence to support the finding upon the issue of whether the broker was the efficient procuring cause of the sale which was consummated.

The findings of fact of a trial judge upon a non-jury trial are entitled to the same weight as a jury verdict. MacGregor v. Sachs, Fla.1952, 57 So.2d 426; Bardee Corp. v. Arnold Altex Aluminum Co., Fla.App. 1961, 134 So.2d 268; La-France Cleaners & Dyers, Inc. v. Argenio, Fla.App.1962, 147 So.2d 330. Therefore, we will not reverse unless it is made to clearly appear that the judgment of the-trial judge is erroneous or where his findings are manifestly against the weight of evidence or are contrary to the legal effect of the evidence. See Talbot v. Talbot, Fla. App.1958, 104 So.2d 410.

The appellant has not carried the burden-of demonstrating such error. We, therefore, affirm. See Norwood v. Davis, 158 Fla. 352, 28 So.2d 872.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

147 So. 2d 348, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/highland-lakes-inc-v-art-present-real-estate-inc-fladistctapp-1962.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack