Case Name: EAST COAST DRY GOODS CO., Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. SOMERSET SPORTSWEAR, INC., a Massachusetts corporation, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1963-03-12
Citations: 151 So. 2d 68
Docket Number: No. 62-508
Parties: EAST COAST DRY GOODS CO., Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. SOMERSET SPORTSWEAR, INC., a Massachusetts corporation, Appellee.
Judges: Before PEARSON, TILLMAN, C. J., and HORTON and HENDRY, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 151
Pages: 68–68

Head Matter:
EAST COAST DRY GOODS CO., Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. SOMERSET SPORTSWEAR, INC., a Massachusetts corporation, Appellee.
No. 62-508.
District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
March 12, 1963.
Rehearing Denied April 4, 1963.
Garber & Chadroff, Miami, for appellant.
Quinan & Swanlco, Miami, for appellee.
Before PEARSON, TILLMAN, C. J., and HORTON and HENDRY, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The defendant appeals a final judgment for the plaintiff upon an account stated. The defendant-appellant does not bring to this Court a transcript of the testimony. He relies entirely on the proposition that his plea of "payment in full" was conclusively proved by a paid check which was admitted in evidence.
The check was for an amount less than the account stated and bore the following printed legend: "This check is in settlement of the following invoices. If not correct, return, no receipt is necessary."
Even if we consider the answer amended to include a proper pleading of accord and satisfaction, the exhibit alone is not sufficient for reversal. The question of whether or not accord and satisfaction had been proved depended upon proper and reasonable inferences to be drawn from all the evidence. J. A. Cantor Associates, Inc. v. Blume, Fla.App.19S8, 106 So.2d 603, 606.
The judgment must be affirmed under the rule stated in Greene v. Hoiriis, Fla.App. 1958, 103 So.2d 226, 228.
Affirmed.