Affirmed. See Jordan v. Jordan, 601 So. 2d 287, 288 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992) (“Where, as here, there was conflicting testimony on the matter in question, it was the responsibility of the trial judge to resolve the conflict. In re Estate of Zimmerman, 84 So. 2d 560, 561 (Fla. 1956); Hartnett v. Lotauro, 82 So. 2d 362, 364 (Fla. 1955). As the ruling is supported by substantial competent evidence, we affirm.”); Heasley v. Evans, 104 So. 2d 854, 857 (Fla. 2d DCA 1958) (“An appellate court will not disturb the findings of fact and conclusions of law of a probate court in a will contest unless there is a lack of substantial competent evidence to support the findings or unless it is clearly manifested that the trial judge misapprehended the legal effect of the evidence in its entirety.”).
PER CURIAM.