Case ID: so2d_265/html/0388-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM. WALDEN, Judge", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

LUDLUM ENTERPRISES, INC., a Florida corporation, d/b/a Ramada Inn of Fort Lauderdale, and Haskell M. Liberman, Appellants, v. DEEM INVESTMENT CORP., a Florida corporation, et al., Appellees.
    No. 71-1043.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    June 29, 1972.
    Rehearing Denied Aug. 30, 1972.
    J. B. Booher, of Booher & McGrotty, Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.
    Michael K. Davis, of Watson, Hubert & Davis, Fort Lauderdale, for appellees.
   PER CURIAM.

We have reviewed the briefs and record on appeal and heard oral argument. On the basis thereof, we are of the opinion that no reversible error has been demonstrated. The judgment appealed from is, therefore, affirmed. See Arison Shipping Company v. Klosters Rederi A/S, Fla.App.1971, 259 So.2d 784; Edenfield v. Crisp, Fla.App.1966, 186 So.2d 545, arid Insurance Management, Inc. v. McLeod, Fla.App.1966, 194 So.2d 16.

Affirmed.

MAGER, J., and WHITE, JOSEPH S., Associate Judge, concur.

WALDEN, J., dissents, with opinion.

WALDEN, Judge

(dissenting):

The appointment of a receiver in this case represented an abuse of discretion and was in nowise legally justified by the facts and circumstances of this case. Among other insufficiencies, there was no showing of fraud, mismanagement, insolvency, danger or peril to the property, or that the appellee would ultimately prevail. Further, there were other more reasonable avenues of assurance and protection available to the court.

I would reverse.