JOHN L. MCKENZIE, APPELLANT,

v.

THE STATE OF FLORIDA, APPELLEE

Citator

Cited By

• Rindfleisch v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 498 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
  …that a mere asking or tendering should require a reversal. Thus any error in the trial court’s ruling on the motion in limine was not preserved when Carnival offered no objection to the evidence when it was presented at trial. See O’Brien v. Ortiz, 467 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985). As its second point on cross-appeal, Carnival argues that the trial court erred in allowing the opinion testimony of plaintiffs’ expert on the coefficient of friction test. The general rule is “evidence of an experiment whereby…
• Fredericson v. Levinson, 495 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
  …object to the disputed testimony when it was offered in evidence before the jury, and did not otherwise renew his prior motion in limine, which had previously been denied, when the disputed testimony was presented to the jury. See O’Brien v. Ortiz, 467 So. 2d 1056, 1057 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985); Parry v. Nationwide Mutual Fire Insurance Co., 407 So. 2d 936, 936 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Swan v. Florida Farm Bureau Insurance Co., 404 So. 2d 802, 803-04 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981). Moreover, the point urged does not present a fun…
• Porter v. Vista Bldg. Maint. Servs., Inc., 630 So. 2d 205 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)
  …dissenting. I respectfully dissent upon the reasoning found in the following authorities. Rindfleisch v. Carnival Cruise Lines, Inc., 498 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); Fredericson v. Levinson, 495 So. 2d 842 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986); OBrien v. Ortiz, 467 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985).…

Authorities Cited

• Scherer v. State, 366 So. 2d 840 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)