Rimer v. Mortgage Guarantee Corp.

168 So. 2d 549
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedNovember 3, 1964
Docket64-342
StatusPublished
Cited by13 cases

This text of 168 So. 2d 549 (Rimer v. Mortgage Guarantee Corp.) 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
Rimer v. Mortgage Guarantee Corp., 168 So. 2d 549 (Fla. Ct. App. 1964).

Opinion

168 So.2d 549 (1964)

Harry B. RIMER, Appellant,
v.
The MORTGAGE GUARANTEE CORP., Arthur S. Friedman, Gerald E. Finley and Frances M. Finley, his wife, Appellees.

No. 64-342.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

November 3, 1964.
Rehearing Denied November 24, 1964.

David Drucker, Coral Gables, for appellant.

Dubbin, Schiff, Berkman & Dubbin, Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, C.J., and CARROLL and HORTON, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, seeks review of an adverse final decree rendered by the chancellor wherein he determined priority of mortgage liens.

The final decree arrived in this court with a presumption of correctness *550 See: Pitts v. Ahlswede, Fla.App. 1962, 139 So.2d 159; City of Miami Beach v. Seacoast Towers-Miami Beach, Fla.App. 1963, 156 So.2d 528. It was incumbent upon the appellant to demonstrate error. See: Lynch v. Coppola, Fla.App. 1961, 129 So.2d 183; Groover v. Simonhoff, Fla.App. 1963, 157 So.2d 541. If there is evidence in the record to support the findings of the chancellor they should not be disturbed. See: Davis v. Levin, Fla.App. 1962, 138 So.2d 351; Lamb v. Dade County, Fla.App. 1964, 159 So.2d 477.

Measuring the record on appeal in light of the above announced principles, it is apparent that there is evidence in the record to support the findings of the chancellor. The appellant has failed to demonstrate error in the application of the law and, therefore, the final decree here under review is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

Related

Hart Land & Cattle Co. v. Reeves Steel, Inc.
273 So. 2d 370 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1973)
Hart Land & Cattle Co. v. Reeves Steel, Inc.
262 So. 2d 267 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1972)
Brock v. Wagner
240 So. 2d 865 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
Barasa v. Board of Public Instruction of Flagler County
238 So. 2d 304 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1970)
Garner v. Gulf Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
218 So. 2d 192 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)
Ridgell v. Eureka Garden Apartments, Inc.
217 So. 2d 142 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1969)
LaRue Corp. v. City of Jacksonville
215 So. 2d 51 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
North American Van Lines, Inc. v. All States Moving & Storage Co.
214 So. 2d 21 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
Smith Plumbing & Heating, Inc. v. Gatlin Lumber & Supply Co.
212 So. 2d 785 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1968)
Gray Roofing Co. v. Duval Federal Savings & Loan Ass'n
191 So. 2d 74 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)
Super Stations, Inc. v. Ram, Inc.
185 So. 2d 748 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)
Miami Beach First National Bank v. Shalleck
182 So. 2d 649 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)
Rimer v. Mortgage Guarantee Corp
173 So. 2d 148 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1965)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
168 So. 2d 549, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rimer-v-mortgage-guarantee-corp-fladistctapp-1964.