ROWSTON, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
LAWRENCE L. GHIDONI, APPELLEE
ROWSTON, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
LAWRENCE L. GHIDONI, APPELLEE
365 So. 2d 184
Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1978)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 2 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
After having considered the record, briefs and oral argument we conclude that the learned trial judge properly applied the relevant law and that the conflicting evidence as to the operative facts was correctly submitted to the jury, whose verdict was consistent with a reasonable interpretation of the evidence as applied to the law properly charged. Although we may well have arrived at a different conclusion had we been sitting as trier of the facts, it is not our prerogative to substitute our view for that of the jury.
Appellant having failed to demonstrate error, the judgment appealed is
AFFIRMED.
BOYER, Acting C. J., and MILLS and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. Fla. Dep't OF Corr., 27 So. 3d 124 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…ions will not bar the filing of a compulsory counterclaim, see Allie v. Ionata, 503 So. 2d 1237 (Fla.1987), but it is well-settled that a permissive counterclaim will be barred if it is filed beyond the statute of limitations. See DuBreuil v. James, 365 So. 2d 184 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). In an effort to avoid the application of the statute of limitations to bar its counterclaim, DOC argued that a cause of action under section 960.297(1) does not accrue until the offender is released from prison, and because Appe…
-
Wichmann v. Conrad & Scherer, LLP, 237 So. 3d 1018 (Fla. 4th DCA 2018)