In re Guardianship of Coolidge

368 So. 2d 426, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14217
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 7, 1979·No. No. 77-1816·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an Interlocutory Appeal1 from an Order of the Circuit Court of Palm Beach which denied objections to an accounting filed by the guardian of the property of Mary Harriet Coolidge. The Order refers to testimony given before the Court and a review of numerous exhibits considered by the Court. Neither the testimony nor any of the exhibits have been included in the Record on Appeal, hence we are unable to determine whether any error was committed by the lower court. It is, of course, the obligation of the appellant to provide us with a record sufficient to demonstrate the errors complained of. Failure to do so mandates affirmance. See Conner v. Coggins„ 349 So.2d 780 (Fla.lst DCA 1977); Dade County Board of Public Instruction v. Foster, 307 So.2d 502 (Fla.3d DCA 1975); and Latin American Benefit Center, Inc. v. Johstoneaux, 257 So.2d 86 (Fla.3d DCA 1972).

The Order appealed from is therefore affirmed.

DAUKSCH and LETTS, JJ., and STET-TIN, HERBERT, Associate Judge, concur.

Footnotes

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

In re Guardianship of Coolidge, 368 So. 2d 426, 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14217 (Fla. Ct. App. 1979).

368 So. 2d 426 (In re Guardianship of Coolidge) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Brake v. Murphy
773 So. 2d 61 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1996)
Commercial Union Assurance Co. of Canada v. Wynn
656 So. 2d 615 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1995)
Sanfer Sports Cars, Inc. v. Barroso Auto Sales, Inc.
602 So. 2d 985 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1992)
Cox v. Trusler
586 So. 2d 502 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)