Kolligian v. Neugent

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Kolligian v. Neugent

541 So. 2d 795, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1038, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2240, 1989 WL 39619

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 25, 1989

DocketNo. 88-778

StatusPublished

This text of 541 So. 2d 795 (Kolligian v. Neugent) 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

Kolligian v. Neugent, 541 So. 2d 795, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 1038, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 2240, 1989 WL 39619 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

After the defendants/appellees obtained a jury verdict in their favor, they filed a motion to recover their taxable costs from the plaintiff/appellant. That motion [796]*796sought to recover costs in the amount of $14,264.72. After a hearing, the trial court entered a Cost Judgment in favor of the defendants in the amount of $5,593.36.

The plaintiff appeals the Cost Judgment, contending that the Cost Judgment is illegal “on its face”. We disagree and affirm.

In challenging the propriety of the Cost Judgment, the plaintiff (as the appellant herein) has the burden of showing that the Cost Judgment is not supported by competent evidence. In the instant case, the plaintiff has failed to demonstrate error. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979).

Affirmed.

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