Murtha v. Stevens

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Murtha v. Stevens

158 So. 2d 538

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedDecember 13, 1963

DocketNo. 63-206

StatusPublished

This text of 158 So. 2d 538 (Murtha v. Stevens) 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

Murtha v. Stevens, 158 So. 2d 538 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final decree awarding the plaintiff certain monies which the chancellor found to be owed by the defendants to the plaintiff.

The findings of the chancellor were based upon his evaluation of certain testimony and documentary evidence which is not contained in the record on appeal.

Since the final decree comes to us with a presumption of correctness, we are left with no course but to affirm the chancellor’s findings. We cannot presume that the plaintiff, at final hearing, failed to sustain his burden of proof or that the defendants’ evidence was sufficient to entitle them to a decree in their favor.

Accordingly, the final decree appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final decree awarding the plaintiff certain monies which the chancellor found to be owed by the defendants to the plaintiff.

The findings of the chancellor were based upon his evaluation of certain testimony and documentary evidence which is not contained in the record on appeal.

Since the final decree comes to us with a presumption of correctness, we are left with no course but to affirm the chancellor’s findings. We cannot presume that the plaintiff, at final hearing, failed to sustain his burden of proof or that the defendants’ evidence was sufficient to entitle them to a decree in their favor.

Accordingly, the final decree appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

158 So. 2d 538, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/murtha-v-stevens-fladistctapp-1963.