Loughridge v. Carillo

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Loughridge v. Carillo

706 So. 2d 138, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2230, 1998 WL 95270

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 6, 1998·No. No. 97-1336·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the trial court’s findings of fact set forth in a final judgment of foreclosure. However, appellant has failed to provide this court with either a transcript of the proceedings below or a stipulated statement of facts pursuant to rule 9.200(b)(4) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. The final judgment reveals no apparent error of law. Accordingly, we must affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, C.J., and GOSHORN and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Appellant challenges the trial court’s findings of fact set forth in a final judgment of foreclosure. However, appellant has failed to provide this court with either a transcript of the proceedings below or a stipulated statement of facts pursuant to rule 9.200(b)(4) of the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure. The final judgment reveals no apparent error of law. Accordingly, we must affirm. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979).

AFFIRMED.

GRIFFIN, C.J., and GOSHORN and ANTOON, JJ., concur.

Loughridge v. Carillo, 706 So. 2d 138, 1998 Fla. App. LEXIS 2230, 1998 WL 95270 (Fla. Ct. App. 1998).

Pincite

706 So. 2d 138 (Loughridge v. Carillo) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related