Lazar v. Orr

207 So. 2d 23, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5866
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedFebruary 13, 1968
DocketNo. 67-391
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 207 So. 2d 23 (Lazar v. Orr) 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
Lazar v. Orr, 207 So. 2d 23, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5866 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This action, filed originally by Lawrence Lazar, is pursued by the executors of his estate who were substituted as plaintiffs upon his death. Lazar sought an accounting from his former law partner with respect to certain services performed during their partnership on behalf of a savings and loan association.

After hearing conflicting testimony and receiving evidence, the lower court determined that the plaintiff was not entitled to such an accounting and entered its order accordingly.

The findings of fact by the lower court reach us with a presumption of correctness and will not be disturbed upon appeal if there is sufficient competent evidence to support them. Our examination of the record discloses sufficient competent evidence to support a finding that the parties had agreed that Orr should have the exclusive rights to fees for any matter involving the savings and loan association.

This result is consistent with Frates v. Nichols, Fla.App. 1962, 140 So.2d 321, 324 where this court stated:

“Parties to a partnership agreement may contract with regard to the distribution of the assets of a partnership upon dissolution in a manner other than that which ordinarily flows by operation of law.”

The appellant has raised a second point on appeal but an examination of the assignment of errors does not show that this point was supported by a proper assignment of error and we, therefore, do not consider this point on appeal.

Accordingly, the order appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.

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

Related

Rudolph v. First Southern Federal Sav. & Loan Ass'n
414 So. 2d 64 (Supreme Court of Alabama, 1982)
Colvin v. State, Department of Transportation
311 So. 2d 366 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1975)
S & S Pharmaceuticals, Inc. v. Hirschfield
226 So. 2d 874 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
207 So. 2d 23, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5866, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lazar-v-orr-fladistctapp-1968.