Wright v. Wright
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1DissentW. Sharp, Judge
I respectfully dissent. The primary error here is the majority opinion’s failure to give the trial court due credence in its fact-finding function, and the majority’s reweighing of evidence presented to the trial court. Both are forbidden to appellate courts by appellate law. See Marsh v. Marsh, 419 So.2d 629 (Fla.1982); Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13 (Fla.1976); Bradley v. Bradley, 347 So.2d 789 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977). Finally, I seriously question the wisdom and validity of the majority’s reliance on the successor trial judge analogy. It may frequently occur that the trial judge who hears a…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Canakaris v. CanakarisSupreme Court of Florida · 1980
- Shaw v. ShawSupreme Court of Florida · 1976
- Cann v. CannDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1976
- Marsh v. MarshSupreme Court of Florida · 1982
- Lee v. LeeDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.