TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Foster v. 163rd Street Realty, Inc.

Victor FOSTER and Iris Foster, his wife v. 163RD STREET REALTY, INC., a Florida corporation, and Phil Schiller Realtor, Inc., a Florida corporation

Foster v. 163rd St. Realty, Inc., 169 So. 2d 359 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1964)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
November 24, 1964
Docket
No. 64-134
Judges
Barkdull, Carroll, Horton
Citations
169 So. 2d 359

Opinion of the Court

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

PER CURIAM.

The appellees sued for and recovered a real estate commission. The case was tried before a jury in the civil court of record in Dade County. This appeal by the defendants presents five points. Three of them deal with rulings by the court during the trial which were discretionary, and as to which no abuse of discretion was shown.

There was adequate support in the evidence for the conclusion reached by the jury that under the applicable law the performance by the brokers was sufficient for recovery. See O’Bryan v. Linton, Fla.1949, 41 So.2d 169 .

A final point, as to the costs included in the judgment, has been considered and found to be without merit.

No reversible error having been made to appear, the judgment appealed from should be and hereby is affirmed.

Affirmed.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 0 cases

No case in this database cites this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
O'Bryan v. Linton, 41 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 1949) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list