In re Estate of Friedman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

In re Estate of Friedman

191 So. 2d 310, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4508

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedNovember 1, 1966

DocketNo. 66-53

StatusPublished

This text of 191 So. 2d 310 (In re Estate of Friedman) 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

In re Estate of Friedman, 191 So. 2d 310, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4508 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By this appeal a legatee who was. a daughter of the decedent seeks reversal of an order of the county judge’s court of Dade County denying her petition for-[311]*311revocation of probate of the decedent’s will. The contention presented by the appellant is that the will was not properly executed. The findings of the county judge that the will was properly signed by the testator, attested and published, are amply supported by the evidence. Under the established rule that such a decision of a probate court will not be disturbed on appeal unless the legal effect of the evidence has been misapprehended or there is a lack of evidence to support the findings, we conclude that no reversible error has been made to appear. See Gair v. Lockhart, Fla. 1950, 45 So.2d 193; Skelton v. Davis, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 432, 89 A.L.R.2d 1114; In re Winans’ Estate, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 473.

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

By this appeal a legatee who was. a daughter of the decedent seeks reversal of an order of the county judge’s court of Dade County denying her petition for-[311]*311revocation of probate of the decedent’s will. The contention presented by the appellant is that the will was not properly executed. The findings of the county judge that the will was properly signed by the testator, attested and published, are amply supported by the evidence. Under the established rule that such a decision of a probate court will not be disturbed on appeal unless the legal effect of the evidence has been misapprehended or there is a lack of evidence to support the findings, we conclude that no reversible error has been made to appear. See Gair v. Lockhart, Fla. 1950, 45 So.2d 193; Skelton v. Davis, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 432, 89 A.L.R.2d 1114; In re Winans’ Estate, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 473.

Accordingly, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

191 So. 2d 310, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 4508, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-estate-of-friedman-fladistctapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack