Court Opinion

ID: 9892908
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-10-25 15:04:52.270369+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:00:31.777064
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                       Opinion filed October 25, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                              No. 3D22-735
                        Lower Tribunal No. 20-2537
                           ________________

                     Manuel J. Menendez, et al.,
                                 Appellants,

                                     vs.

                           Rafael Bonafonte,
                                  Appellee.

     An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Barbara
Areces, Judge.

      Wasson & Associates, Chartered and Roy D. Wasson; Law Offices of
Robert F. Reynolds, P.A., and Robert F. Reynolds (Ft. Lauderdale), for
appellants.

      Kula & Associates, P.A., and Elliot B. Kula and W. Aaron Daniel and
William D. Mueller, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, C.J., and LINDSEY and LOBREE, JJ.

     PER CURIAM.
      Affirmed. See Archange v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 314 So. 3d 717,

718 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021) (“Fratangelo v. Coosemans, 264 So. 3d 1079, 1079

(Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (‘When the trial court conducts a full evidentiary hearing

on a motion to enforce settlement, “[t]he findings of the trial court, as the trier

of fact, come to this court clothed with a presumption of correctness, and

where there is substantial competent evidence to sustain the actions of the

trial court, the appellate court cannot substitute its opinion on the evidence

but rather must indulge every fact and inference in support of the trial court's

judgment, which is the equivalent of a jury verdict.”’ (quoting Smiley v.

Greyhound Lines, Inc., 704 So. 2d 204, 205 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998))).”).

                                        2