Case ID: so2d_554/html/0583-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

NORTHERN TRUST BANK OF FLORIDA, N.A., as Guardian of the property of Alec Rosefsky, Incompetent, Appellant, v. Edith ROSEFSKY, Appellee.
    No. 89-347.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Dec. 19, 1989.
    Shutts & Bowen and Phillip G. New-comm and John K. Harris, Jr. and Steven D. Beres and John T. Kolinski, Miami, for appellant.
    Wallace, Engels, Pertnoy, Solowsky, Newman & Allen and Frank D. Newman, and Marianne A. Vos, Miami, for appellee.
    Before SCHWARTZ, C.J., and BASKIN and COPE, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The trial court’s finding by clear and convincing evidence that Rosefsky effected a valid, unconditional gift to his wife is supported by ample competent evidence in the record. See Winner v. Winner, 370 So.2d 845 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979). Hence, it may not be disturbed on appeal. Strawgate v. Turner, 339 So.2d 1112, 1113 (Fla.1976); City of Miami Beach v. Sussman, 376 So.2d 1218, 1219 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979); Placet, Inc. v. Ashton, 368 So.2d 404, 409 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 378 So.2d 343, 347 (Fla.1979).

There was likewise no error in the denial of the appellant’s motion for new trial based on allegedly newly discovered evidence. 38 Fla.Jur.2d New Trial §§ 63, 65 (1982).

Affirmed. 
      
      . We do not decide whether this burden of proof was correctly placed upon the appellee below.