1. Home
  2. Browse Decisions
  3. So.2d
  4. 265 So.2d
  5. 265 So.2d 387 (1972)
 

ROSENSTEIN v. RATICOFF

No. 71-922.

265 So.2d 387 (1972)

Arnold ROSENSTEIN, d/b/a Chatham Construction Co., Appellant, v. Jerald RATICOFF and Joan Raticoff, His Wife, Appellees.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Rehearing Denied August 25, 1972.

Attorney(s) appearing for the Case

J.I. Watson, Hollywood, for appellant.

James A. Dixon, Jr., and Dixon, Dixon, Lane & Mitchell, Miami, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

While we agree with each of the abstract legal propositions advanced by appellant, we find that we are unable to apply them in the instant appeal and unable to determine that reversible error has been committed. The reason is that we have not been furnished with the record, or enough of it, whereby we can conclusively and definitively determine the whole factual basis for the trial court decisions. The judgment comes, of course, with a presumption of correctness...

Let's get started

Leagle.com

Welcome to the leading source of independent legal reporting
Sign on now to see your case.
Or view more than 10 million decisions and orders.

  • Updated daily.
  • Uncompromising quality.
  • Complete, Accurate, Current.

Listed below are the cases that are cited in this Featured Case. Click the citation to see the full text of the cited case. Citations are also linked in the body of the Featured Case.

Cited Cases

  • No Cases Found

Listed below are those cases in which this Featured Case is cited. Click on the case name to see the full text of the citing case.

Citing Cases