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

District Court of Appeal of Florida

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

132 So. 3d 1234, 2014 WL 784867, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 2589

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 26, 2014

DocketNo. 3D12-3038

StatusPublished

This text of 132 So. 3d 1234 (Lauramar I Ltd. Partnership v. Mel Fisher Maritime Heritage Society, Inc.) 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

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).

Pincite

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

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).

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

132 So. 3d 1234, 2014 WL 784867, 2014 Fla. App. LEXIS 2589, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lauramar-i-ltd-partnership-v-mel-fisher-maritime-heritage-society-inc-fladistctapp-2014.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack