Lorbach v. Eckis

Supreme Court of Florida

Lorbach v. Eckis

24 So. 2d 901, 157 Fla. 78, 1946 Fla. LEXIS 666

DecidedFebruary 15, 1946

StatusPublished

This text of 24 So. 2d 901 (Lorbach v. Eckis) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Supreme Court of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Lorbach v. Eckis, 24 So. 2d 901, 157 Fla. 78, 1946 Fla. LEXIS 666 (Fla. 1946).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

From a decree dismissing a bill of complaint at final hearing the plaintiff brings this appeal. The purpose of the suit was to secure an accounting from the defendants, and a decree of the court finding that a partnership relation existed between the parties, Lorbach and Eckis and that each as partners had an equal share in the assets and business of the enterprise which was the subject matter of the litigation. The special master found that the plaintiff had failed to prove the allegations of the bill of complaint. On final hearing the chancellor sustained the findings of the special master and entered a final decree dismissing the bill of complaint. The record amply supports the decree that was rendered. The decree appealed from must therefore be affirmed.

It is so ordered.

CHAPMAN, C. J., BROWN, THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM:

From a decree dismissing a bill of complaint at final hearing the plaintiff brings this appeal. The purpose of the suit was to secure an accounting from the defendants, and a decree of the court finding that a partnership relation existed between the parties, Lorbach and Eckis and that each as partners had an equal share in the assets and business of the enterprise which was the subject matter of the litigation. The special master found that the plaintiff had failed to prove the allegations of the bill of complaint. On final hearing the chancellor sustained the findings of the special master and entered a final decree dismissing the bill of complaint. The record amply supports the decree that was rendered. The decree appealed from must therefore be affirmed.

It is so ordered.

CHAPMAN, C. J., BROWN, THOMAS and SEBRING, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

24 So. 2d 901, 157 Fla. 78, 1946 Fla. LEXIS 666, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lorbach-v-eckis-fla-1946.