Owens v. Owens

128 So. 3d 974, 2013 WL 6865558, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 20741
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 31, 2013
DocketNo. 1D12-5648
StatusPublished

This text of 128 So. 3d 974 (Owens v. Owens) 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
Owens v. Owens, 128 So. 3d 974, 2013 WL 6865558, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 20741 (Fla. Ct. App. 2013).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. See Klette v. Klette, 785 So.2d 562, 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“Appellant’s failure to provide either a transcript or proper substitute, such as a stipulated statement of the facts, defeats the appellate court’s ability to review either the factual or legal basis for the trial court’s decision.”); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979).

PADOVANO, ROWE, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Klette v. Klette
785 So. 2d 562 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee
377 So. 2d 1150 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1979)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
128 So. 3d 974, 2013 WL 6865558, 2013 Fla. App. LEXIS 20741, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/owens-v-owens-fladistctapp-2013.