Case Name: In re ESTATE OF Maurice HOROWITZ, deceased. Edith Horowitz BROIDA, Appellant, v. Samuel S. SMITH, et al., Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1991-03-12
Citations: 579 So. 2d 141
Docket Number: No. 90-544
Parties: In re ESTATE OF Maurice HOROWITZ, deceased. Edith Horowitz BROIDA, Appellant, v. Samuel S. SMITH, et al., Appellees.
Judges: Before HUBBART, COPE and GODERICH, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 579
Pages: 141–142

Head Matter:
In re ESTATE OF Maurice HOROWITZ, deceased. Edith Horowitz BROIDA, Appellant, v. Samuel S. SMITH, et al., Appellees.
No. 90-544.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
March 12, 1991.
Rehearing Denied June 13, 1991.
Edith Broida, in pro. per.
Ruden, Barnett, MeClosky, Smith, Schus-ter & Russell, and Samuel Smith, Gene S. Rosen, Kelner & Kelner, and Milton Kel-ner, Bernard B. Weksler, for appellees.
Before HUBBART, COPE and GODERICH, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Edith Broida appeals a final judgment in probate. Two of the issues raised by this appeal were the subject of earlier orders in probate which were appealed to, and affirmed by, this court. Broida v. Smith, 529 So.2d 700 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988) (mem.) (affirming order striking petition for approval of family settlement and petition for revocation of probate). With regard to the other points on appeal, appellant has demonstrated no reversible error. See In re: Estate of Lunga, 360 So.2d 109, 111-12 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 366 So.2d 882, 883 (Fla.1978); In re: Estate of Ryecheck, 323 So.2d 51, 52 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); see also Applegate v. Barnett Bank, 377 So.2d 1150 (Fla.1979). In all respects the final judgment is affirmed.