Legal Opinion

Brancaccio v. Jackal Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided May 3, 1994No. 93-820PublishedCited by 3 opinions

1Per curiam

The appellants have failed to provide a' transcript of the proceedings below or a proper substitute and, therefore, the trial court’s ruling must be presumed correct. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1980); In re Guardianship of Read, 555 So.2d 869 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989); Ahmed v. Travelers Indem. Co., 516 So.2d 40 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Unlike the court in Gold, Vann & White, P.A. v. DeBerry, 1994 WL 150171 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), we are unable to adequately review the entire trial court record to determine whether the contents of the notes and drawings were important…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Applegate v. Barnett Bank of TallahasseeSupreme Court of Florida · 1979
  2. Ahmed v. Travelers Indemnity Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
  3. Schoeppl v. OkolowitzDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1961
  4. In Re Guardianship of ReadDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
  5. Gills v. AngelisDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975

3Cited by3 opinions

  1. Prymus v. PrymusDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2000
  2. Green v. EMSA Ltd. PartnershipDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998
  3. R.C. Storage One, Inc. v. Strand Realty, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API