Merritt v. Williams
| Citation | 295 So.2d 310 |
| Decision Date | 06 June 1974 |
| Docket Number | No. T-32,T-32 |
| Parties | Leila Williams MERRITT and Ophelia R. Brooks, Appellants, v. Daniel WILLIAMS and Corine Merritt a/k/a Corine Williams, Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Elmer M. Norton, of Norton & Wood, Jacksonville, for appellants.
Ernest D. Jackson, Sr., Jacksonville, for appellees.
Appellants were plaintiffs in an ejectment action below. Appellees were defendants. The action involved possession and ownership of a certain parcel of property in Duval County. The final judgment contains a recitation that the parties stipulated to certain facts. One of the material issues before the trial court was whether a certain conveyance had been made for consideration. The record before us is totally devoid of any evidence on that issue. Indeed, the record on appeal consists only of the complaint, answer, copies of two deeds, the final judgment and certain post-trial motions, orders and notices. The stipulation referred to in the final judgment, if written, is not a part of the record and, if oral, has apparently not been reduced to writing. During oral arguments the attorneys for the respective parties argued various testimony alleged to have been before the trial judge but it is not before us. We presume, but do not know, that the various hearings before the judge were unreported. Although the Florida Appellate Rules provide for a stipulated record in such instances we have none.
The law is well settled that an appellate court may not properly consider a case unless the record, by one of the methods provided by the Florida Appellate Rules, reveals all evidence and proceedings which were before the trial court which are material to a resolution of the points on appeal. (Aetna Casualty and Surety Company v. Simpson, Fla.App. (1st) 1961, 128 So.2d 420; Croft v. Young, Fla.App. (1st) 1966, 188 So.2d 859)
The law is equally well settled that the findings and judgment of the trial court come to us clothed with a presumption of correctness and may not be disturbed upon appeal in the absence of a record demonstrating errors of law. (See 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals, Sections 159, 314, 346 and 347, and cases therein cited.)
The Supreme Court of Florida has repeatedly admonished district courts to beware of substituting appellate factual judgment for that of the trier of facts. Westerman v. Shell's City Inc., Sup.Ct.Fla.1972, 265 So.2d 43; Exchange Bank of St. Augustine v. The Florida National...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Firstamerica Development Corp. v. Volusia County, T--271
...Bureau Casualty Ins. Co., Fla.App. (1st) 1968, 215 So.2d 59; Parker v. State, Fla.App. (1st) 1974, 295 So.2d 312; Merritt v. Williams, Fla.App. (1st) 1974, 295 So.2d 310; and Exchange Bank of St. Augustine v. The Florida Nat. Bank, Sup.Ct.Fla.1974, 292 So.2d In view of the findings of the t......
-
Howell v. State
...(See Largo v. Imperial Homes Corporation, Fla.App.2d 1974, 300 So.2d 311) We have not overlooked our holdings in Merritt v. Williams, Fla.App.1st 1974, 295 So.2d 310 and White v. White, Fla.App.1st 1975, 306 So.2d 608, wherein we held that an appellate court may not consider a case unless t......
-
Valladares v. Junco-Valladares, 30 So. 3d 519
...and may not be disturbed upon appeal in the absence of a record demonstrating errors of law." [30 So. 3d 523] Merritt v. Williams, 295 So. 2d 310, 311 (Fla. 1st DCA 1974). Beyond this deferential standard of review, the husband in the instant action is disadvantaged because he represented h......
-
Daniels v. Owens, 77-629
...63 (Fla.1st DCA 1963); Shaw v. Puleo, 159 So.2d 641 (Fla.1964); Miller v. James, 187 So.2d 901 (Fla.2d DCA 1966); Merritt v. Williams, 295 So.2d 310 (Fla.1st DCA 1974); Lassitter v. International Union of Operating Engineers, 349 So.2d 622 (Fla.1977); Sweeney v. Wiggins, 350 So.2d 536 (Fla.......