Reynolds v. Teeters Brothers Contracting Co.

460 So. 2d 575, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 50, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16439
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedDecember 19, 1984
DocketNo. 83-2093
StatusPublished

This text of 460 So. 2d 575 (Reynolds v. Teeters Brothers Contracting Co.) 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
Reynolds v. Teeters Brothers Contracting Co., 460 So. 2d 575, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 50, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16439 (Fla. Ct. App. 1984).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Upon examination and review of the record we find that there is competent substantial evidence to support the trial court’s findings both as to the issue of rescission and the amount of any claims due one party from the other. Having made such a determination, we are without authority to disturb the rulings of the trial court challenged on appeal, regardless of our own views on the issues. Horn & Hardart, Florida, Inc. v. Dietz, 417 So.2d 1039 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982).

ANSTEAD, C.J., and DOWNEY . and GLICKSTEIN, JJ., concur.

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

Related

Horn & Hardart, Florida, Inc. v. Dietz
417 So. 2d 1039 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
460 So. 2d 575, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 50, 1984 Fla. App. LEXIS 16439, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/reynolds-v-teeters-brothers-contracting-co-fladistctapp-1984.