Lauramar I Ltd. Partnership v. Mel Fisher Maritime Heritage Society, Inc.

132 So. 3d 1234, 2014 WL 784867, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 2589
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided February 26, 2014·No. No. 3D12-3038·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See § 695.01(1), Fla. Stat. (2012); Mayfield v. First City Bank of Fla., 95 So.Sd 398, 401 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012), review denied, 116 So.3d 1261 (Fla.2013) (“Section 695.01 is a ‘notice’ recording statute, the primary purpose of which is to protect subsequent purchasers (including mortgagees and creditors) against claims arising from prior unrecorded instruments.”); see also Sunshine State Ins. Co. v. Davide, 117 So.3d 1142, 1144 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013) (“When a cause is tried without a jury, the trial judge’s findings of fact are clothed with a presumption of correctness on appeal, and these findings will not be disturbed unless the appellant can demonstrate that they are clearly erroneous.”) (citations omitted).

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

Lauramar I Ltd. Partnership v. Mel Fisher Maritime Heritage Society, Inc., 132 So. 3d 1234, 2014 WL 784867, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 2589 (Fla. Ct. App. 2014).

132 So. 3d 1234 (Lauramar I Ltd. Partnership v. Mel Fisher Maritime Heritage Society, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sunshine State Insurance v. Davide
117 So. 3d 1142 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2013)