FLORIDA FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF JACKSONVILLE, A CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ALFRED DUPONT DENT AND DENT AND ANDREW G. P. HOBBS, INDIVIDUALLY AND DOING BUSINESS AS COMPUTER INSTITUTE OF NORTH AMERICA, INC., APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Florida First National Bank sought to recover lease payments from Dent and Hobbs, primarily under a guaranty agreement, after the lessee corporation never took possession and a different company occupied the premises. The court affirmed the trial court's denial of the bank's motion for new trial and motion for directed verdict, finding sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict that there was no corporate indebtedness to guarantee.
The trial court properly denied both motions because the jury's verdict was supported by sufficient evidence and no clear abuse of discretion occurred. The evidence established that CINA never took possession, CIF was a separate corporate entity, and the bank was aware of these facts, therefore the jury could reasonably find no ratification and no corporate indebtedness to guarantee.
[1] A trial court has broad discretion in considering a motion for a new trial, and its decision will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear showing of abuse.
[2] A trial court should not grant a motion for a new trial unless a jury of reasonable people could not have reached the verdict rendered.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“The trial court enjoys broad discretion in considering whether to grant a motion for new trial and that discretion will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear showing of abuse.”
Establishes the high standard of review for denials of new trial motions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn August 22, 1969, the bank leased equipment to Computer Institute of North America (CINA), with the lease signed by authorized bank officers and CIN…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Guaranty Agreement Interpretation cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Florida First National Bank of Jacksonville (bank) seeks review of the trial court’s order denying its motion for new trial and for directed verdict. We affirm.
On August 22, 1969, the Computer Institute of North America (CINA), lessee, executed a lease agreement with the bank, lessor. The instrument was signed by the bank’s cashier and by an assistant vice president. CINA’s president and secretary signed the document as did Hobbs and Dent.
On October 2,1969, Dent and Hobbs signed a guaranty agreement providing they would guarantee all obligations which CINA owed the bank. CINA never took possession due to a disagreement within its corporate self. Dent, Hobbs and other CINA stockholders then formed the Computer Institute of Florida (CIF), a separate corporate entity which moved onto the premises originally leased by CINA. Dent and Hobbs owned over fifty percent (50%) of the CIF stock. In 1971, Dent, CIF’s president, asked the bank to find another tenant because CIF was closing. The bank sued Dent and Hobbs on the lease individually, as partners and as guarantors.
At trial, the court refused to admit the leasing agreement because it had been improperly executed. No other evidence was admitted and the court directed a verdict in favor of Hobbs and Dent.
On appeal, this court held that although the agreement was improperly executed, the lease was admissible as evidence of an underlying agreement for which Hobbs and Dent could be liable under the guaranty agreement. Florida First National Bank v. Dent, 350 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). This court remanded the cause and the trial court retried the matter on the issues of whether appellees ratified the lease by occupying the premises and whether they were liable under the guaranty agreement.
The jury returned the verdict finding Hobbs and Dent had not ratified the lease, that the guaranty agreement covered indebtedness due the bank from CINA but there was no corporate indebtedness. The bank moved for a new trial and renewed its previous motion for a directed verdict.
The trial court entered an order denying the motions. The bank appeals this denial.
The trial court enjoys broad discretion in considering whether to grant a motion for new trial and that discretion will not be disturbed on appeal absent a clear showing of abuse. Saunders v. Smith, 382 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980); Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla.1959).
Further, a trial court should not grant a motion for new trial unless a jury of reasonable people could not have reached the verdict rendered. City of Hollywood v. Jarkesy, 343. So. 2d 886 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977); Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1969).
The bank has failed to demonstrate reversible error. Dent testified he and Hobbs were not partners. Mason, one of the bank’s executives, testified that CINA never moved onto the leased premises, that the bank was aware CIF moved onto the leased premises, and that the bank was aware CIF was a separate corporate entity. Mason also testified Dent and Hobbs did not maintain a person al office on the leased premises. This evidence is sufficient to sustain the jury’s determination.
The trial court was, therefore, correct in denying the motion for new trial.
A motion for directed verdict after the jury returns a verdict should be granted only when the evidence, taken in a light most favorable to the opposing party, demonstrates a jury could not reasonably differ on the existence of a material fact and the moving party is entitled to a judgment as a matter of law. Forshee v. Peninsular Life Insurance Co., 370 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1979). The evidence presented below does not meet this standard. Therefore, the motion was appropriately denied. The bank’s other contentions do not warrant reversal. Accordingly, the order is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
McCORD and WENTWORTH, JJ„ and LILES, WOODIE A. (Retired), Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (15 total)
-
Rupert B. Brown v. The Est. OF A.P. Stuckey, Sr., 749 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 1999)…1990). For instance, where a new trial is granted because the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence, a trial court may not substitute its view of the evidence for that of the jury. Florida First Nat’l Bank of Jacksonville v. Dent, 404 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 1st DCA), dismissed, 411 So. 2d 381 (Fla.1981). A verdict can be found to be against the manifest weight of the evidence only when it is clear, obvious, and indisputable that the jury was wrong. Lee, supra at 380, citing Crown Cork & Seal Co.,…
-
Taylor v. Ganas, 443 So. 2d 251 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…ant or deny new trial, a judge may not substitute his view of the evidence for that of the jury. A new trial is not to be granted unless no reasonable jury could have reached the verdict rendered. Florida First National Bank of Jacksonville v. Dent, 404 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1969). We affirm the granting of a new trial on the sole issue of compensatory damages and remand for that purpose. We reverse the granting of a new trial on the issues of liability, compara…
-
Scandinavian World Cruises (bahamas) v. Cronin, 509 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)…ion. Id. at 146. If reasonable men could disagree as to the propriety of the action taken by the trial court, then the action is not unreasonable and there can be no finding of an abuse of discretion. Florida First Nat. Bank of Jacksonville v. Dent, 404 So. 2d 1123 (Fla. 1st DCA), dismissed, 411 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 1981); Salkay v. State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co., 398 So. 2d 916 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Staib v. Ferrari, Inc., 391 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). After a careful review of the record and evidence, we con…
Previewing 3 of 15 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1959)
- Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla. 1969)
- Forshee v. Peninsular Life Ins. Co., 370 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Fla. First Nat'l Bank OF Jacksonville v. Dent, 350 So. 2d 481 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- United Servs. Auto. Ass'n v. Kiibler, 382 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)
- Morera v. City OF Miami, 382 So. 2d 1254 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)