Golden & Cowan, P.A. v. Estate of Kosofsky

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that the trial court’s error in allowing telephonic testimony over the appellant’s objection and in violation of rule 2.530(d)(1) was harmless due to the existence of other independent evidence which would have supported the trial court’s decision
• holding that the trial court’s error in allowing telephonic testimony over the appellant’s objection and in violation of rule 2.530(d)(1) was harmless due to the existence of other independent evidence which would have supported the trial court’s decision
• trial court erroneously allowed telephonic testimony at trial because petitioner objected but the error was harmless “due to the existence of other independent evidence which would have led the trial court to reach the same conclusion.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).