Plissner v. Goodall Rubber Co.
216 So. 2d 228, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 4680
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided December 10, 1968·No. No. 68-83·Published·Cited by 2 cases
Opinion
The only question presented upon this appeal is whether the trial judge’s finding was against the manifest weight of the evidence. The court was called upon to construe a lease between the parties and determine whether it prohibited a certain activity.
The suit was for an injunction and, therefore, governed by equitable principles. There was evidence that the parties had by their own acts agreed upon the construction which the court gave to the lease. We conclude that the appellant has not demonstrated error.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Plissner v. Goodall Rubber Co., 216 So. 2d 228, 1968 Fla. App. LEXIS 4680 (Fla. Ct. App. 1968).
216 So. 2d 228 (Plissner v. Goodall Rubber Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Green
579 So. 2d 402 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1991)
Florida Crime Prevention Commission v. Cafiero
7 Fla. Supp. 2d 84 (Florida Circuit Courts, 1984)