Case ID: so2d_745/html/0451-01.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

SHAMROCK MONITORING, INC., Appellant, v. DURAG, INC., Appellee.
    No. 98-2862.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Nov. 10, 1999.
    Wald, Stafford & Wald and Stormie Stafford, Coral Gables, for appellant.
    Robert Cooper and Mark Bodner, Davie, for appellee.
    Before NESBITT, COPE and GERSTEN, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

We conclude that the evidence is suffk cient to support the trial court’s finding, after bench trial, that the appellant successor corporation is a mere continuation of the predecessor corporation, see Anjad Munim, M.D., P.A., v. Azar, 648 So.2d 145, 154 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994), and that the question of the ownership of the Total-Bank account presented a triable issue. See Shaw v. Shaw, 334 So.2d 13, 16 (Fla. 1976). The appellee judgment creditor concedes that there are two factual errors in the final judgment, but appellee argues, and we agree, that the errors are not material to the ultimate conclusion. We have carefully considered appellant’s arguments to the contrary, but are not persuaded thereby.

Affirmed.