Opinion · Fllaw Florida

POLAND v. POLAND, 112 So.2d 588 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1959)

112 So.2d 588

Type
Opinion
Court
Fllaw Florida
Jurisdiction
Fllaw
Date
1959-06-09
Topic
general

POLAND v. POLAND, 112 So.2d 588 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1959) ROGER A. POLAND, APPELLANT, v. MARY POLAND, APPELLEE. No. 58-760.District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Citator

UpLaw has not yet analyzed POLAND v. POLAND, 112 So.2d 588 (Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1959). The absence of a flag is not a finding that it is good law.

POLAND v. POLAND,112 So.2d 588(Fla.App. 3 Dist. 1959)
ROGER A. POLAND, APPELLANT, v. MARY POLAND, APPELLEE.
No. 58-760.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
June 9, 1959.
Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Pat Cannon, J.Page 589
Marchant Perkins, Miami, for appellant.

Thomas B. Duff, Miami, for appellee.
PER CURIAM.
In this appeal the defendant-husband urges: 1. the evidence was insufficient to support the relief granted (alimony unconnected with divorce); 2. The evidence was such that the husband was "entitled" to a decree of divorce; 3. the alimony awarded was "unwarranted under the circumstances." We are thus presented with a reargument of the equities involved.

We have reviewed the record and have determined: 1. that all of the elements necessary for granting of relief under § 65.09, Fla. Stat. F.S.A., were presentedfor trialbefore the chancellor; 2. the chancellor, as the trier of facts, did not commit reversible error when he found upon conflicting evidence that the defendant husband was not entitled to a decree of divorce; 3. the amount of the alimony awarded was not such as to shock the conscience of this court or demonstrate a misconception of the applicable principles by the chancellor.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, CHAS., C.J., and HORTON and PEARSON, JJ., concur.