Case ID: so2d_595/html/0589-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. ANSTEAD, Judge,", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Robert T. BERGIN, Jr., and J. Burke Culler, Jr., Appellants/Cross-Appellees, v. Daniel H. JONES, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
    Nos. 89-3282, 89-3283, 90-0841, 90-1161, 90-1415 and 90-1449.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 1, 1992.
    D. Culver Smith, III, Jones, Foster, Johnston & Stubbs, P.A., for appellants/cross-appellees.
    John A. Gentry, III, Law Offices of John A. Gentry, III, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee/cross-appellant.
   PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LETTS and FARMER, JJ., concur.

ANSTEAD, J., concurring specially with opinion.

ANSTEAD, Judge,

specially concurring.

Although the parties have presented some close questions as to possible errors by the trial court when the issues involved are isolated and considered out of context, I nevertheless concur in the majority’s af-firmance of the trial court’s entire resolution of this law partnership dissolution action. As in a marriage dissolution resolved in court, the instance will be rare, if ever, that the parties cannot pick out some flaw in the court’s resolution. Nevertheless, there are cases, including this one, where we should refrain from tampering with an overall resolution that appears to be equitable and as sound as can be expected under the circumstances.