AVI LIMOR, APPELLANT,
v.
NANCI CONLI, REALTOR, INDIVIDUALLY AND FOR THE USE AND BENEFIT OF JOE COMESANA, NATHANIEL AMBERS, AND AYKE RATTANSEY, AS TRUSTEE, 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.
The court affirmed judgment awarding brokerage commission and indemnification to appellees, holding that the third-party defendant-indemnitor cannot challenge an allegedly inadequate verdict when any error benefited him and failed to preserve objections at trial.
A third-party defendant-indemnitor cannot complain that a verdict is inadequate when any error inured to his benefit, and failure to request jury instructions on damages or object to verdict forms waives such contentions.
[1] A third-party defendant-indemnitor who fails to request jury instructions on damages or object to verdict forms at trial cannot challenge the adequacy of a verdict on app…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellant Limor was a third-party defendant-indemnitor in an action where appellees Conli and others sought a brokerage commission. Limor received tim…
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 Notice Of Action cases and more on FLexlaw
BASKIN, Judge.
We affirm the final judgment awarding appellees a brokerage commission, the judgment indemnifying appellees, and the judgment for costs. Appellant, as the third-party defendant-indemnitor, may not complain that the verdict was inadequate when any error inured to his benefit, McMullen v. Hoofnagle, 106 Fla. 16, 142 So. 598 (1932); Golden v. Harrell, 147 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962), cert. denied, 155 So. 2d 150 (Fla.1963); see Edmundson v. Swope, 395 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980); thus, appellant’s contention that the evidence supported only a larger award than that returned by the jury, or nothing at all, is unavailing. Because appellant failed to request a jury instruction on damages and objected neither to the verdict forms nor to the instructions, accord Golden v. Harrell; see Wright v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. of Miami, 256 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.470, we reject his contention.
Appellant declined to appear and defend the action seeking indemnification under the contract although he received timely notice; consequently the third-party complaint resulted in a conclusive adverse judgment. McArthur v. Gaines, 286 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); Olin’s Rent-A-Car System, Inc. v. Royal Continental Hotels, Inc., 187 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 194 So. 2d 621 (Fla.1966); Westinghouse Electric Corp. v. J.C. Penney Co., 166 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964); see Hull & Company v. McGetrick, 414 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982).
We reject as without merit appellant’s remaining contentions.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited (11 total)
- Westinghouse Elec. Corp. v. J. C. Penney Co., Inc., 166 So. 2d 211 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)
- Nelson v. City of Miami, 194 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 1966)
- MacARTHUR v. Gaines, 286 So. 2d 608 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973)
- Olin's Rent-A-Car Sys., Inc. v. Royal Cont'l Hotels, Inc., 187 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 4th DCA 1966)
- Hull & Co., Inc. v. McGETRICK, 414 So. 2d 243 (Fla. 3d DCA 1982)
- Golden v. Harrell, 147 So. 2d 350 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- McMullen v. Hoofnagle, 106 Fla. 16 (Fla. 1932)
- Edmondson v. Avis Mitchell Swope & Nationwide Gen. Ins. Co., 395 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- Elouise Wright v. Coca Cola Bottling Co. OF Miami, 256 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971)
- Greenwald v. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n, 155 So. 2d 150 (Fla. 1963)