Leifer v. Leifer
489 So. 2d 215, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1270, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8109
Opinion
Finding that appellant failed to preserve for appellate review the issue of the applicability of the “Dead Man’s Statute” to a will contest, see Hartley v. Florida East Coast Railway, 339 So.2d 630 (Fla.1976), and finding no merit in the other issues presented, see Cripe v. Atlantic First National Bank, 422 So.2d 820 (Fla.1982); Smith v. Callison, 152 Fla. 516, 12 So.2d 381 (1943), we affirm the order denying appellant’s petition for revocation of probate and the orders taxing costs and attorney’s fees to appellant.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Leifer v. Leifer, 489 So. 2d 215, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1270, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8109 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).
489 So. 2d 215 (Leifer v. Leifer) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Hartley v. Florida East Coast Railway Company
339 So. 2d 630 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1976)
Cripe v. ATLANTIC FIRST NAT. BANK, ETC.
422 So. 2d 820 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1982)
Smith v. Callison
12 So. 2d 381 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1943)