WILLIAM E. CROOKS, APPELLANT,
v.
ATLANTIC NATIONAL BANK OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court affirmed the trial court's judgment because it was based on legally sufficient evidentiary factual findings, even though the case could have been decided differently.
This case involves an appeal from a judgment in a promissory note case. The specific facts are not detailed due to their unique nature and lack of ben…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Legal Sufficiency Of Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
DAUKSCH, Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment in a promissory note case. The facts which un-derly the judgment are unique and we are quite confident they shall remain so. For that reason and because no benefit to anyone would result in the exposure of them, we do not set out the facts.
We affirm the judgment of the court because it is based upon evidentiary factual findings adverse to appellant although we recognize the case could well have been decided by the trial court adverse to appellee. We do not, and cannot, reweigh factual findings of trial courts; we only determine if they are legally sufficient to support the judgment. Strawgate v. Turner, 339 So. 2d 1112 (Fla.1976); Holland v. Gross, 89 So. 2d 255 (Fla.1956); Laufer v. Norma Fashions, Inc., 418 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
The appellant here was not dealt with as he should have been. The actions of the bank officer, Ziegler, acknowledged by the parties hereto as the primary wrongdoer, were certainly not within usual banking practices, as frankly admitted by the bank. The trial judge’s absolution of the bank is legally correct, however, based upon the pleadings and evidence in support of those pleadings. There were no allegations of negligent hiring or negligent supervision against the bank or against the immediate supervisor of the wrongdoer, hence that issue is not before us at this time.
We affirm the judgment.
AFFIRMED.
COBB, J., and DIAMANTIS, G.N., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Talmadge Moore v. Chodorow, 925 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…aiman v. Fed. Ins. Co., 798 So. 2d 811 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001). Appellate courts “do not, and cannot, reweigh factual findings of trial courts; we only determine if they are legally sufficient to support the judgment.” Crooks v. Atl. Nat’l Bank of Fla., 445 So. 2d 1042, 1042 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). Additionally, “[a]s an appellate court, we must disregard conflicting evidence and accept the facts in evidence which are most favorable to the party that prevailed below.” Blue Lakes Apartments, Ltd. v. George Gowing, Inc…
-
Dykes v. Dykes, 475 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985)…rt’s finding that the substantial fund given to him by his grandfather was the former husband’s asset as there was substantial evidence supporting that determination. Strawgate v. Turner, 339 So. 2d 1112 (Fla.1976); Crooks v. Atlantic National Bank, 445 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984). It is well settled that an award of attorney’s fees on appeal is governed by the “concept of comparative abilities to secure counsel rather than on a party’s victory.” Thornton v. Thornton, 433 So. 2d 682, 684 (Fla. 5th DCA), re…
-
Jewel Halker McGANN v. Halker, 530 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…ile we may or may not have reached the same conclusion ourselves, the existence of record evidence to support that of the trial judge requires its affirmance. See Strawgate v. Turner, 339 [*441] So. 2d 1112 (Fla.1976); Crooks v. Atlantic Nat’l Bank, 445 So. 2d 1042 (Fla. 5th DCA 1984); Home Ins. Co. v. Mendelson, 367 So. 2d 1071 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Department of Transp. v. Morehouse, 350 So. 2d 529 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977), cert, denied, 358 So. 2d 129 (Fla.1978). Affirmed.…
Authorities Cited
- Laufer v. Norma Fashions, Inc., 418 So. 2d 437 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Strawgate v. Dorothea Chase Turner, 339 So. 2d 1112 (Fla. 1976)
- Bernardo de la Pena v. SC Mota Assocs. Ltd. P'ship (Fla. 3d DCA 2024)
- Holland v. Gross, 89 So. 2d 255 (Fla. 1956)