HUSSING v. SEGAL ZUCKERMAN (2024)

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Carolina HUSSING, et al., Appellants, v. SEGAL ZUCKERMAN, P.A., Appellee.

No. 3D24-0023

Decided: December 04, 2024

Before SCALES, GORDO, and GOODEN, JJ.

AM Law LLC, and Gary M. Murphree, for appellants. Rottenstreich Farley Bronstein Fisher Potter Hodas LLP, and Richard I. Segal, for appellee.

Affirmed. See Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla. 1979) (“Without a record of the trial proceedings, the appellate court can not properly resolve the underlying factual issues so as to conclude that the trial court's judgment is not supported by the evidence or by an alternative theory.”); Shojaie v. Gables Pro. Ctr., 974 So. 2d 1140, 1141 (Fla. 3d DCA 2008) (“ ’It is the responsibility and duty of the appellant to provide the appellate court with a record sufficient to review the matter assigned.’ ” (quoting Gleim v. Gleim, 176 So. 2d 610, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965))); see also Portner v. Koppel, 382 So. 3d 742, 747 (Fla. 4th DCA 2024) (holding that an appellate court reviews factual findings of counsel's authority to settle a case on behalf of a client for substantial, competent evidence).

PER CURIAM.

Was this helpful?

Why was this helpful?

Easy to understand

Solved my problem

Other

Why was this not helpful?

Missing the information I need

Too complicated / too many steps

Out of date

Other

Thank you for your feedback!

Trusted by Consumers. Recognized by AI.

As the largest network of trusted legal brands, we help firms build authority across the platforms consumers and AI systems rely on most. Our network helps attorneys strengthen visibility, credibility, and preference where legal decisions begin.

Explore the Network