TREND REALTY OF GAINESVILLE, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
FRED B. BULLARD, JR., MARION E. FORSMAN, JULIAN H. LIFSEY, AND FRANK W. PALMER, 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 held that the trial court improperly directed a verdict for the owners because conflicting evidence existed on material issues that should have been decided by a jury.
Trend Realty appealed a final order directing a verdict for the owners. The appeal centered on whether a jury could have found for the realtor based o…
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 Jury Question cases and more on FLexlaw
SHIVERS, Judge.
Trend Realty of Gainesville, Inc. (the realtor) appeals final order of the trial court directing a verdict for Fred B. Bullard, Jr., et al. (the owners).
Upon perusal of the record and after able oral arguments by counsel for both sides, we conclude that it was improper for the trial court to direct a verdict. We reverse since there are questions of evidence that should be considered and determined by a jury in reaching a verdict. The evidence as a whole, with all reasonable deductions to be drawn therefrom, does not point to but one possible conclusion.
We find conflicting evidence on at least three important points:
1. Whether Julian H. Lifsey, one of the joint venturers or partners, had authority to bind the other joint venturers or partners in negotiating the terms of a contractual agreement.
2. Whether the terms of the “Purchase Agreement” dated July 8, 1981, signed by Philip I. Emmer, as purchaser, were agreed to by Julian H. Lifsey.
3. Whether there was agreement on Article 7.07 of the “Purchase Agreement.”
In reviewing a directed verdict the appellate court must consider the evidence in a light most favorable to the party moved against. Although the evidence is conflicting, the evidence taken in a light most favorable to appellant realtor shows that Lifsey and Emmer came to an agreement concerning every item of the transaction, despite the fact that this was a complex transaction. It was error to direct a verdict against the appellant where the jury could lawfully have returned a verdict for the appellant on the issues.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
THOMPSON and ZEHMER, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Grady Albritton v. Gandy, 531 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…t as to this issue. In reviewing a directed verdict, an appellate court must consider the evidence in a light most favorable to the party moved against and resolve all inferences in favor of that party. Trend Realty of Gainesville, Inc. v. Bullard, 461 So. 2d 298, 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). Thus, where the evidence as a whole, with all reasonable inferences drawn therefrom, allows a jury to lawfully return a verdict for the non-moving party, a trial court will commit error if it grants a motion for directed ve…
-
Marcel E. Marty v. Norine Deep Gresh, 501 So. 2d 87 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)…ndamental that in reviewing the correctness of a trial court’s decision regarding a directed verdict, an “appellate court must consider the evidence in a light most favorable to the party moved against.” Trend Realty of Gainesville, Inc. v. Bullard, 461 So. 2d 298, 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). In the instant case, the non-moving party is appellee, Mrs. Gresh. A careful reading of the facts of the case at bar as well as of the substantive law surrounding the torts of malicious prosecution and abuse of process disc…
-
Elinor J. Scott and Joe Scott v. Otis Elevator Co., 680 So. 2d 462 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)…favor, and a directed verdict is improper if there is any evidence to support a possible verdict for the nonmoving party. Pritchett v. Jacksonville Auction, Inc., 449 So. 2d 364, 365 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984); Trend Realty of Gainesville, Inc. v. Bullard, 461 So. 2d 298, 299 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); McDonald v. McGowan, 402 So. 2d 1197, 1199 (Fla. 5th DCA), review dismissed sub nom. Allmon v. McDonald, 411 So. 2d 380 (Fla.1981). A directed verdict in a negligence action should only be entered if the plaintiff could not…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence