Phipps v. Sheffman

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Phipps v. Sheffman

211 So. 2d 598, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5477

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 11, 1968

DocketNo. 67-613

StatusPublished

Cited by4 cases

This text of 211 So. 2d 598 (Phipps v. Sheffman) 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

Phipps v. Sheffman, 211 So. 2d 598, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5477 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is by the plaintiffs, Phipps, from a final judgment for the defendants below. The case was submitted to the trial court on a written stipulation of facts.

The findings of the trial judge in the final judgment were based on depositions and a stipulation of facts and not on live testimony. The presumption of correctness which usually attends a final judgment is therefore weak. See West Shore Restaurant Corp. v. Turk, Fla.1958, [599]*599101 So.2d 123; L & S Enterprises, Inc. v. Miami Tile & Terrazzo, Inc., Fla.App. 1963, 148 So.2d 299. Nevertheless, the judgment appealed having been a final judgment, a presumption of correctness remains present and the appellants have the burden of showing error. Fla.Jur. Appeals § 316.

The findings and final judgments of the trial court have not been shown to be erroneous and they are, therefore, affirmed. See Pushee v. Johnson, 123 Fla. 305, 166 So. 847, 105 A.L.R. 789 (1936); Mason v. Cunningham, 111 Fla. 200, 149 So. 331 (1933); Shaffran v. Holness, Fla.App.1958, 102 So.2d 35; and West v. Equitable Mortg. Co., 112 Ga. 377, 37 S.E. 357 (1900).

The appellee has appealed from, and cross-assigned as error the failure of the trial court to award attorneys’ fees to its counsel. No error has been clearly demonstrated in this regard. The final judgment is, therefore,

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is by the plaintiffs, Phipps, from a final judgment for the defendants below. The case was submitted to the trial court on a written stipulation of facts.

The findings of the trial judge in the final judgment were based on depositions and a stipulation of facts and not on live testimony. The presumption of correctness which usually attends a final judgment is therefore weak. See West Shore Restaurant Corp. v. Turk, Fla.1958, [599]*599101 So.2d 123; L & S Enterprises, Inc. v. Miami Tile & Terrazzo, Inc., Fla.App. 1963, 148 So.2d 299. Nevertheless, the judgment appealed having been a final judgment, a presumption of correctness remains present and the appellants have the burden of showing error. Fla.Jur. Appeals § 316.

The findings and final judgments of the trial court have not been shown to be erroneous and they are, therefore, affirmed. See Pushee v. Johnson, 123 Fla. 305, 166 So. 847, 105 A.L.R. 789 (1936); Mason v. Cunningham, 111 Fla. 200, 149 So. 331 (1933); Shaffran v. Holness, Fla.App.1958, 102 So.2d 35; and West v. Equitable Mortg. Co., 112 Ga. 377, 37 S.E. 357 (1900).

The appellee has appealed from, and cross-assigned as error the failure of the trial court to award attorneys’ fees to its counsel. No error has been clearly demonstrated in this regard. The final judgment is, therefore,

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

211 So. 2d 598, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 5477, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phipps-v-sheffman-fladistctapp-1968.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack