Hively v. Dunn

169 So. 2d 507
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 1, 1964
DocketNo. 64-279
StatusPublished

This text of 169 So. 2d 507 (Hively v. Dunn) 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
Hively v. Dunn, 169 So. 2d 507 (Fla. Ct. App. 1964).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant appeals a final judgment entered at the conclusion of a non-jury trial. The action was on a written contract. On this appeal the substantial question is whether the evidence is sufficient to support the judgment. A review of the record reveals that the court acting as a trier of fact may have found that the plaintiff’s evidence was entitled to belief and that the testimony presented by the defendant (in direct conflict) was unworthy of belief. This being true, and the plaintiff having established a prima facie case, the record reveals a sufficient support for the judgment reached by the trial court. Compare Clausi v. Casner Motors, Inc., Fla.App.1959, 112 So.2d 587.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Clausi v. Casner Motors, Inc.
112 So. 2d 587 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1959)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
169 So. 2d 507, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hively-v-dunn-fladistctapp-1964.