FILOMENA GAETANO, ALSO KNOWN AS FILOMENA TUFARO, APPELLANT,
v.
GRAND UNION SUPER MARKETS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
FILOMENA GAETANO, ALSO KNOWN AS FILOMENA TUFARO, APPELLANT,
GRAND UNION SUPER MARKETS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
130 So. 2d 626
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1961)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 5 cases
Opinion of the Court
The plaintiff appeals an order granting new trial upon the ground that the jury’s verdict is against the manifest weight of the evidence. Having examined the record we hold that appellant has failed to make error clearly appear. Cloud v. Fallis, Fla. 1959, 110 So.2d 669.
Affirmed.
HORTON, C. J., and PEARSON and CARROLL, CHAS., JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Severi v. Neville, 361 So. 2d 786 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978)…evocable nature of her act.” There is no recorded case that we can find which supports the proposition that a grantor may cancel a deed, because he or she was not aware of the inability to later demand a reconveyance. As was said in Parks v. Harden, 130 So. 2d 626 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1961), citing from the Supreme Court in Travis v. Travis, 81 Fla. 309, 87 So. 762 (1921), The instant case does not involve a condition of permanent disability or incapacity, but to the contrary, concerns a temporary condition of alle…
-
Marcinkewicz v. Quattrocchi, 199 So. 3d 513 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…is presumed once the existence of the deed is established. Because the son was challenging the validity of the deed, the son was required to shoulder the burden of proving the mother lacked the mental capacity to sign the deed. See Parks v. Harden, 130 So. 2d 626, 628 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961). Not only did the son have the burden of proof, but the strong presumption in favor of the validity of deeds can only be overcome “by clear, strong and convincing evidence.” Espriella v. Del- [*516] valle, 844 So. 2d 674, 67…
-
Drapp v. McDaniel (Fla. 2d DCA 2020)…See Marcinkewicz v. Quattrocchi, 199 So. 3d 513, 515 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). And it is the burden of the party seeking to invalidate the deed to prove that the grantor lacked capacity at the time the deed was executed. Id.; see also Parks v. Harden, 130 So. 2d 626, 628 (Fla. 2d DCA 1961) ("The burden rests on those seeking to set aside a deed on the ground of incapacity of the grantor at the time the instrument was executed."). Similarly, "a plaintiff who contests a conveyance on the ground of undue influenc…
Authorities Cited
- Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1959)