FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF EUREKA, FORMERLY EUREKA STATE BANK, EUREKA, ILLINOIS, APPELLANT,
v.
CHESTER DAVIS, APPELLEE

Fla. 4th DCA | 1969-10-07
No. 69-63
WALDEN, McCAIN and OWEN, JJ., concur.
226 So. 2d 857 Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1969)

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.

Synopsis

The Fourth District Court of Appeal affirmed a final judgment for the defendant in a replevin action because the appellant (plaintiff) failed to provide a sufficient record for appellate review, specifically by not transcribing the trial proceedings or providing a stipulated statement of facts.


Holding

No, the appellate record is insufficient to permit review of the final judgment because the appellate court cannot review all the evidence that was before the trial court without a transcription or stipulated statement of facts.


Key Quotes

“Since the only points raised on this appeal which are based upon proper assignments of error cannot be determined without appellate review of all the evidence which was before the trial court, the record is simply insufficient to permit appellate review of the final judgment.”

This quote explains the core reason for the appellate court's decision: the inadequacy of the record prevented them from reviewing the merits of the appeal.

Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

The appellant, First National Bank of Eureka, was the plaintiff in a replevin action against Chester Davis. The trial court entered a final judgment i…

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.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

*858PER CURIAM.

Pursuant to Rule 3.10(e), F.A.R., 32 F. S.A., the court dispenses with oral argument in this case.

Appellant was plaintiff in a replevin action and appeals from a final judgment entered in favor of defendant following a trial before the court. The trial proceedings were not transcribed nor is there a stipulated statement of facts presented to this court in lieu thereof. Since the only points raised on this appeal which are based upon proper assignments of error cannot be determined without appellate review of all the evidence which was before the trial court, the record is simply insufficient to permit appellate review of the final judgment. See City of South Bay v. Armstrong, Fla.App.1966, 188 So.2d 21. The judgment is therefore affirmed.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, McCAIN and OWEN, JJ., concur.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw