SAMUEL POLK, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA

Citator

Cited By (20 total)

• Hill v. Dep't OF Corr., 513 So. 2d 129 (Fla. 1987)
  …determined that appellants waived any ambiguities when they failed to object to the form of the verdict. Rosario v. Melvin, 446 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). Likewise, the Fifth District Court of Appeal noted in Keller Industries, Inc. v. Morgart, 412 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982): The fault ... must be placed upon the ... trial attorney who led the court into error by approving, or failing to object to, the form of the verdict.... For all we know ... trial counsel intentionally, for tactical reasons, cho…
• Ashby Div. OF Consol. Aluminum Corp. v. Dobkin, 458 So. 2d 335 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984)
  …to the jury being discharged. See Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Price, 46 So. 2d 481 (Fla.1950) (trial counsel must [*338] bring inconsistency of verdict to trial court’s attention before the jury is discharged); Keller Industries, Inc. v. Morgart, 412 So. 2d 950 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (same). Since the entire claim must be tried anew, it is unnecessary to address defendant’s final point on appeal, that the trial court erred in granting a new trial on the wife’s loss of consortium claim. Reversed and remanded…
• Coba v. Tricam Indus., Inc., 164 So. 3d 637 (Fla. 2015)
  …rties to not timely object “as a conscious choice of strategy” since the complaining party may risk having the award unfavorably adjusted. See C.G. Chase Constr. Co. v. Colon, 725 So. 2d 1144, 1145 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Keller Indus., Inc. v. Morgart, 412 So. 2d 950, 951 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982) (“For all we know, defendant’s trial counsel intentionally, for tactical reasons, chose not to bring the problem to the court’s attention.”). Third, mandating parties to immediately object preserves limited judicial resourc…

Authorities Cited

• Brown v. State, 152 Fla. 853 (Fla. 1943)
• La Barbera v. State, 63 So. 2d 654 (Fla. 1953)
• Owens v. State, 308 So. 2d 171 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)