ERMA G. GIBSON, APPELLANT,
v.
METROPOLITAN LIFE INS. CO., APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Harmful Error Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
ROBERT P. SMITH, Jr., Judge.
On plaintiff’s appeal from an adverse judgment entered on a jury verdict against appellant’s claim for disability insurance benefits, we find no error in the trial court permitting a physician to express an opinion concerning the extent of appellant’s ability, despite a knee injury and some pain, to seek work in sedentary employment; no error in denying appellant’s motions for directed verdict and for new trial, there being credibility issues for the-jury; and no error in permitting cross-examination of appellant concerning her rehabilitation efforts, that being pertinent to the issue of whether she was permanently and totally disabled, as claimed. The trial court perhaps unduly restricted appellant’s redirect interrogation of her expert vocational counsellor concerning the job market in appellant’s small hometown, but the facts sought to be elicited were not proffered; moreover, the ruling is not shown to be harmful error in the context of the entire interrogation.
AFFIRMED.
BOOTH and SHAW, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp. v. Ashe, 50 So. 3d 645 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010)…urces. Relevant evidence is evidence “tending to prove or disprove a material fact.” § 90.401, Fla. Stat. “All relevant evidence is admissible, except as provided by law.” § 90.402, Fla. Stat. (emphasis added); Gibson v. Metropolitan Life Ins. Co., 381 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980) (no error in permitting cross examination of plaintiff regarding her rehabilitation attempts, as the evidence was relevant to the question of whether she was disabled). Evidence that such flood insurance benefits were received wa…
-
Ritzer v. Jefferson Stores, Inc., 516 So. 2d 48 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)…known that the testimony came within the common experience of the jurors. The record does not support this argument. Expert testimony may be used to show diminished earning capacity. See § 90.702, Fla.Stat. (1985); Gibson v. Metropolitan Life Ins., 381 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980); Allstate Insurance Co. v. Shilling, supra. Since the record contained evidence supporting a claim for diminished earning capacity, the trial court should have instructed the jury on this claim. Its failure to do so constituted…