AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY; CHASE FEDERAL SAVINGS & LOAN ASSOCIATION OF MIAMI BEACH AND H.L. EDWARDS CONSTRUCTION CO., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANTS,
v.
STELLA KAUFMAN AND ISADORE KAUFMAN, HER HUSBAND, 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 appellate court affirmed the trial court's order granting a new trial solely on damages.
The jury awarded damages to the Kaufmans after Mrs. Kaufman slipped and fell due to defective pavement. The trial court granted a new trial on damages…
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 New Trial On Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
[*521] PER CURIAM.
Following return of a jury verdict in favor of Mr. and Mrs. Kaufman, the trial court granted a new trial solely as to damages. The court based its ruling on what it determined to be a “grossly inadequate” award in light of the damages sustained by Mrs. Kaufman when she slipped and fell as a result of defective pavement. The court found that the jury was prejudiced by improper closing remarks of counsel for appellant, H.L. Edwards Construction Co.*
Noting that a trial judge is in a “much better position than an appellate court to pass on the ultimate correctness of the jury’s verdict,” Pyms v. Meranda, 98 So. 2d 341, 343 (Fla.1957); Staib v. Ferrari, Inc., 391 So. 2d 295, 297 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), citing Castlewood International Corp. v. LaFleur, 322 So. 2d 520, 522 (Fla.1975), we affirm the trial court’s order. Furthermore, we rely upon the well-established law of Florida that a trial court’s discretion to grant a new trial should not be disturbed except upon a clear showing of abuse. Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla.1959). We find no abuse of discretion. Appellants’ remaining points lack merit.
Affirmed.
*
Counsel for appellant, H.L. Edwards Construction Co. stated:
I added all this up at $461,775 [the total of damages suggested as compensable by plaintiff s attorney] and the only thing that I see is Mr. Rodgers and Mr. Virgin [counsel for the plaintiffs] getting rich.
That’s all that I see with $461,000.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dade Athletic Club, Inc. v. Delaney, 464 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Wackenhut Corp. v. Canty, 359 So. 2d 430 (Fla.1978); Griffis v. Hill, 230 So. 2d 143 (Fla.1969); Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla.1959); Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Kaufman, 463 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Stevens v. Mount Vernon Fire Insurance Co., 395 So. 2d 1206 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); Anderson v. Chirogianis, 384 So. 2d 1289 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), review discharged, 401 So. 2d 1322 (Fla.1981).…
-
Canal Ins. Co. v. Susman, 472 So. 2d 557 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…PER CURIAM. Affirmed. See Ford Motor Co. v. Kikis, 401 So. 2d 1341 (Fla.1981); Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla.1959); Aetna Casualty & Surety Co. v. Kaufman, 463 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Roberto v. Allstate Insurance Co., 457 So. 2d 1148 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Loranger v. State, Department of Transportation, 448 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983); Venet v. Garcia, 433 So. 2d 53 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Palmer v. Thomas, 284…
Authorities Cited
- Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1959)
- Castlewood Int'l Corp. v. LaFLEUR, 322 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 1975)
- Pyms v. Meranda, 98 So. 2d 341 (Fla. 1957)
- Ann Marie Staib and her husband v. Ferrari, Inc., 391 So. 2d 295 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980)