Tully v. Tully
817 So. 2d 1055, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 7838, 2002 WL 1224968
Opinion
AFFIRMED. See Klette v. Klette, 785 So.2d 562, 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (“Appellant’s failure to provide either a transcript or proper substitute, such as a stipulated statement of the facts, defeats the appellate court’s ability to review either the factual or legal basis for the trial court’s decision.”); Mead v. Mead, 726 So.2d 865, 865 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); see generally Applegate v. Barnett Bank, 377 So.2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979).
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Tully v. Tully, 817 So. 2d 1055, 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 7838, 2002 WL 1224968 (Fla. Ct. App. 2002).
817 So. 2d 1055 (Tully v. Tully) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Klette v. Klette
785 So. 2d 562 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 2001)
Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee
377 So. 2d 1150 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1979)
Mead v. Mead
726 So. 2d 865 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)