Peppe v. Bryant, 190 So. 2d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)
190 So. 2d 795
US-DOC-21166288
locator
Case details
Bluebook Citation
Peppe v. Bryant, 190 So. 2d 795 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)
Full caption
Elizabeth Hulda PEPPE, a single woman, R. A. Holman and Mary Holman, his wife, and Alice W. Beebe, Appellants, v. C. Farris BRYANT, Governor et al. as the Trustees of the Internal Improvement Fund, and Siesta Properties, Inc., Appellees.
Country
United States
Jurisdiction
Florida (FL)
Court
Fla. 2d Dist. Ct. App.
Decided
1966
Fla. R. App. P. 9.800
Peppe v. Bryant, 190 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
PER CURIAM.
Appellants have taken both an appeal and an interlocutory appeal from a partial summary decree entered by the chancellor below. We determine that the partial summary decree appealed is interlocutory in nature and therefore dismiss the appeal and proceed to the merits of this cause on the interlocutory appeal.
We have carefully examined the record on appeal in this case and studied the excellent briefs submitted by the parties.
When viewed in the light of the case of Siesta Properties, Inc. v. Hart, Fla.App. 1960, 122 So.2d 218, and Fla.St. 66.13, F.S.A., we hold that the appellants have failed to show that the learned chancellor below committed any reversible error in entering the partial summary decree herein appealed. It has long been the established law of this jurisdiction that the appellant has the burden of showing reversible error.
The partial summary decree appealed is hereby affirmed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
SHANNON, Acting C. J., and LILES and HOBSON, JJ., concur.