SUSAN LEVY AND HOWARD LEVY, HER HUSBAND, APPELLANTS,
v.
HAWK'S CAY, INC., HAWK'S CAY INVESTORS, LTD., BRANDY GROUP, INC., BRANDY MARINE OF THE KEYS, INC. AND JEFFREY SYLVESTER, 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 committed prejudicial error by failing to strike three jurors for cause who indicated they could not be impartial.
The Levys appealed an adverse jury verdict in their negligence and products liability action. Three jurors indicated during voir dire that they could …
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 Automobile Negligence cases and more on FLexlaw
HERBOTH S. RYDER, Associate Judge.
The Levys appeal an adverse final judgment entered upon a jury verdict and a judgment taxing costs in their action for automobile negligence and products liability. They assert that the trial court committed prejudicial error when it failed to strike for cause three jurors who indicated during voir dire that they could not be impartial. We agree, and reverse.
The record reveals that the three jurors in question clearly indicated that they had negative attitudes toward the legal system due to previous unfavorable experiences with lawsuits filed against themselves or members of their families, and that their predispositions would result in bias. When any reasonable doubt exists as to whether a juror possesses the state of mind necessary to render an impartial verdict based solely on the evidence submitted and the law announced at trial, he should be excused. Longshore v. Fronrath Chevrolet, Inc., 527 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988); Club West v. Tropigas of Florida, Inc., 514 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987), review denied, 523 So. 2d 579 (Fla.1988). Cf. Price v. State, 538 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989). Here, the jurors’ testimony was more than sufficient to raise a reasonable doubt as to their impartiality. The trial court’s failure to excuse these jurors for cause constitutes reversible error, because the Levys were unnecessarily forced to use peremptory challenges to excuse the objectionable jurors, then exhausted their remaining peremptory challenges, and were thereafter denied additional peremptory challenges. Hill v. State, 477 So. 2d 553 (Fla.1985); Smith v. State, 516 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987).
Because of our reversal on the Levys’ first point on appeal, we need not address their remaining two points. We reverse and remand for a new trial, and in so doing, we also reverse the judgment taxing costs against the Levys.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fazzolari v. The City OF W. Palm Beach, 608 So. 2d 927 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…out a particular class of litigation will not, in itself, disqualify a juror where it appears that the bias can be set aside. Montecristi Condominium Ass’n. v. Hickey, 408 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Unlike the facts of Levy v. Hawk’s Cay, Inc., 543 So. 2d 1299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), the jurors’ negative feelings here about the legal system were not associated with lawsuits against them or their families or with their personal acquaintance with a party or a party’s lawyer, see also Longshore v. Fronrath [*929…
-
Tizon v. Royal Caribbean Cruise Line, 645 So. 2d 504 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)…nable doubt exists as to whether a juror possesses the state of mind necessary to render an impartial verdict based solely on the evidence submitted and the law announced at trial, he should be excused. Singer, 109 So. 2d 7; Levy v. Hawks Cay, Inc., 543 So. 2d 1299 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied 553 So. 2d 1165 (Fla.1989). Mrs. Safinski’s conflicting statements certainly created such a reasonable doubt and it was an abuse of discretion not to excuse her for cause. We therefore reverse and remand for a new trial b…
-
Kochalka v. Lyndse Bourgeois, 162 So. 3d 1122 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015)…ht be biased was not party-specific, her mere implication of bias should have led to dismissal). Ms. Blake’s additional remarks that she had no faith in the jury system likewise should have led to her disqualification. See Levy v. Hawk’s Cay, Inc., 543 So. 2d 1299, 1300 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (reversing for a new trial where the trial court refused to strike potential jurors who “indicated that they had negative attitudes toward the legal system due to previous unfavorable experiences with lawsuits filed against…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Hill v. State, 477 So. 2d 553 (Fla. 1985)
- Price v. State, 538 So. 2d 486 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989)
- Club W., Inc. v. Tropigas OF Fla., Inc., 514 So. 2d 426 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Longshore v. Fronrath Chevrolet, Inc., 527 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 4th DCA 1988)
- Smith v. State, 516 So. 2d 43 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)