From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pinsker v. Filmore Investors Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 8, 1971
243 So. 2d 165 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

Opinion

No. 70-123.

January 12, 1971. Rehearing Denied February 8, 1971.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, George E. Schulz, J.

Shutts Bowen and Thomas H. Anderson, Miami, for appellant.

Simon, Hays Grundwerg, and Jack D. Burris, Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.


Ethel E. Pinsker, plaintiff, appeals from a final judgment rendered for the defendants in a declaratory decree action.

Plaintiff agrees that the finding of facts contained in the final decree are not in dispute except as to the accounting.

We have reviewed the conclusions and adjudications in the final judgment which were based on those findings of fact and hold that no reversible error has been demonstrated in the final decree, including the accounting.

No error was made in the denial of plaintiff's motion to amend the complaint by adding additional defendants and to have the available assets of all the defendants marshalled. This motion was made after plaintiff had presented her case and rested. No abuse of discretion by the trial judge has been shown in this appeal. Wooten v. Wooten, Fla.App. 1968, 213 So.2d 292; Triax, Inc. v. City of Treasure Island, Fla.App. 1968, 208 So.2d 669; and Houston Texas Gas Oil Corporation v. Hoeffner, Fla.App. 1961, 132 So.2d 38.

The final decree is

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Pinsker v. Filmore Investors Corp.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Feb 8, 1971
243 So. 2d 165 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)
Case details for

Pinsker v. Filmore Investors Corp.

Case Details

Full title:ETHEL E. PINSKER, APPELLANT, v. FILMORE INVESTORS CORP., A FLORIDA…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Feb 8, 1971

Citations

243 So. 2d 165 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

Citing Cases

Trexler v. Fiat Motor Co.

In Ocala Music and Marine Center v. Caldwell, 389 So.2d 222 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), we stated that "although it…

Casas v. Rosell

However, because of the delay and the fact that the motion appears as an afterthought or reassessment of the…