From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Good v. Douglas Gardens

Supreme Court of Florida, Division B
Feb 2, 1951
50 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 1951)

Opinion

February 2, 1951.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Marshall C. Wiseheart, J.

Durant Durant, Miami, for appellants.

Lane, Muir, Wakefield Lane, and J.M. Flowers, all of Miami, for appellee.


This was a suit to recover a broker's commission alleged to be due the plaintiffs, appellants here, for their services in procuring a purchaser for defendant's property. Trial was had before the court, a jury trial being waived, and judgment was entered for defendant, from which judgment plaintiffs have appealed.

There were many disputes and conflicts in the evidence on the issue of whether the plaintiffs were the procuring cause of the transaction, which disputes and conflicts were resolved in defendant's favor by the lower court, acting as the trier of the facts. There was ample evidence, even though disputed, to warrant a finding that the plaintiffs were not the efficient procuring cause of the transaction. Under such circumstances, this court is not authorized to overturn the judgment of the court below. See Bixby v. Hotel Mirasol, Inc., Fla., 37 So.2d 700.

The judgment is, accordingly, affirmed.

SEBRING, C.J., and CHAPMAN and ADAMS, JJ., concur.


Summaries of

Good v. Douglas Gardens

Supreme Court of Florida, Division B
Feb 2, 1951
50 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 1951)
Case details for

Good v. Douglas Gardens

Case Details

Full title:GOOD ET AL. v. DOUGLAS GARDENS, INC

Court:Supreme Court of Florida, Division B

Date published: Feb 2, 1951

Citations

50 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 1951)

Citing Cases

Mellet v. Henry

In Cameron v. Powers, supra, the Supreme Court reversed a judgment for a broker upon a holding that it was…

Dick Bond v. Oakland Consolidated

The final judgment from which this appeal is taken is, therefore, affirmed. See Salter v. Knowles, Fla.App.…