JAMES W. TATUM, APPELLANT,

v.

MARY ANN TATUM, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By (19 total)

• Nordyne, Inc. v. Fla. Mobile Home Supply, Inc., 625 So. 2d 1283 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993)
  …. Levinson, 495 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). Our review of the record leads us to conclude, further, that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by ruling as it did regarding the testimony of those four witnesses. See Dale v. Ford Motor Co., 409 So. 2d 232 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982) (absent abuse of discretion, ruling regarding admissibility will not be disturbed). III. PERMITTING EVIDENCE OF LOST FUTURE PROFITS Nordyne next argues that the trial court erred when it permitted an expert witness retained by…
• LaMARR v. Lang, 796 So. 2d 1208 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001)
  …o. 2d 1381, 1382 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). A trial court has wide discretion in determining the admissibility of evidence, and, absent an abuse of discretion, the trial court’s ruling on evidentiary matters will not be overturned. Dale v. Ford Motor Co., 409 So. 2d 232, 234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). When reviewing erroneous rulings on evidentiary matters, we examine the entire record to determine if the error is harmless. Each of the evidentiary rulings discussed above impermissibly allowed evidence proving only LaMar…
• The Bank OF NEW York Mellon v. Johnson, 185 So. 3d 594 (Fla. 5th DCA 2016)
  …tion in determining the admissibility of evidence, and, absent an abuse of discretion, the trial court’s ruling on evidentiary matters will not be overturned,” LaMarr v. Lang, 796 So. 2d 1208, 1209 (Fla. 5th DCA 2001) (citing Dale v. Ford Motor Co., 409 So. 2d 232, 234 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)). However, “that discretion is limited by the rules of evidence.” Michael v. State, 884 So. 2d 83, 84 (Fla. 2d DCA 2004) (citations omitted). The business records exception to the hearsay rule allows a party to offer such r…

Authorities Cited

• Gennarro D. Jackson v. Fla. Parole & Prob. Comm'n, 409 So. 2d 230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)