Stacey E. Frerichs v. Arthur Mattson

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 24, 2025·No. 3D2024-1848·Published

Opinion

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida

Opinion filed September 24, 2025. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D24-1848 Lower Tribunal No. 22-CA-177-M ________________

Stacey E. Frerichs, et al., Appellants,

vs.

Arthur Mattson, et al., Appellees.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Monroe County, Mark H. Jones, Judge.

Older, Lundy, Koch & Martino, and Jon Johnson (Tampa), for appellants.

Harvey J. Sepler, P.A., and Harvey J. Sepler (Hollywood); Campbell & Malafy, and Richard A. Malafy (Marathon), for appellees.

Before LINDSEY, BOKOR and GOODEN, JJ.

PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Taylor, Bean & Whitaker Mortg. Co. v. Wright, 253 So.

3d 72, 73 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018) (“The trial court’s factual findings are reviewed

under a competent, substantial evidence standard.”); Heineman v. State,

327 So. 2d 898, 898–99 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976) (“Knowledge is an elusive

quality. Like intent, since it is a state of mind, it is often not subject to direct

proof and can only be inferred from the circumstances of the case by the trier

of fact.”).

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

Stacey E. Frerichs v. Arthur Mattson, (Fla. Ct. App. 2025).

Stacey E. Frerichs v. Arthur Mattson (Stacey E. Frerichs v. Arthur Mattson) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Heineman v. State
327 So. 2d 898 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1976)
Taylor Bean & Whitaker Mortgage Company v. Joseph M. Wright and Megan L. Wright
253 So. 3d 72 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2018)