Lydem v. DePiera
John A. LYDEM, doing business as Mickler & Lyden v. Lilia Rojas DePIERA and Henri F. Withington and Gladys Withington, his wife
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
PER CURIAM.
The appellant, plaintiff in the trial court, seeks review of a final judgment rendered in favor of the defendant following a non-jury trial.
*574 Unfortunately, the trial proceedings were not transcribed and the record has not been perfected in accordance with the principles announced in Potash v. Dry & Company, 8 Fla.Supp. 174, which procedure was cited with approval by this court in Moyer v. Moyer, Fla.App.1959, 114 So.2d 638 .
Therefore, not having the evidence before us that was taken in the trial court, we have no alternative but to affirm the final judgment. See: Hall v. Davis, Fla.App. 1958, 106 So.2d 599 .
Affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.