CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION
v.
MIRIAM JAEHNIG, ET AL.
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.
Citizens Property Insurance Corporation appealed a trial court decision regarding jury instructions. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the lower court's jury instruction decisions, holding that such decisions rest within the trial court's discretion and should not be reversed absent a showing of prejudicial error amounting to a miscarriage of justice.
The court affirmed the trial court's jury instruction decisions, finding that appellants failed to meet their burden of showing that the jury was misled or that the instructions were reasonably calculated to confuse or mislead the jury.
[1] Decisions regarding jury instructions rest within the sound discretion of the trial court and should not be overturned on appeal absent a showing of prejudicial error.
[2] Prejudicial error requiring a reversal of judgment or a new trial occurs only where the error complained of has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Florida law is clear that decisions regarding jury instructions rest within the sound discretion of the trial court and should not be overturned on appeal absent a showing of prejudicial error [...] A 'miscarriage of justice' arises where instructions are reasonably calculated to confuse or mislead the jury”
Establishes the legal standard for reviewing jury instruction decisions on appeal
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe opinion does not provide detailed facts of the underlying case, focusing instead on the legal standard for reviewing jury instruction decisions on…
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.
PER CURIAM.
Affirmed. See Gonzalez v. Rose, 752 So. 2d 39, 41 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (“Florida law is clear that decisions regarding jury instructions rest within the sound discretion of the trial court and should not be overturned on appeal absent a showing of prejudicial error . . . Prejudicial error requiring a reversal of judgment or a new trial occurs only where ‘the error complained of has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.’ A ‘miscarriage of justice’ arises where instructions are reasonably calculated to confuse or mislead the jury . . . We do not believe that the appellants have met their burden under this standard.” (quoting Goldschmidt v. Holman, 571 So. 2d 422, 425 (Fla.1990))); Cruz v. Plasencia, 778 So. 2d 458, 461 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001) (“It is well settled that jury instructions must be examined and considered as a whole together with the evidence, and in this case, the verdict form, in determining whether the jury instructions were proper. Ultimately, such a decision must turn on whether the appellate court finds from the record on appeal that the jury was misled by the failure to give the instruction. As held by the Florida Supreme Court . . . a verdict will not be set aside merely because the court failed to give instructions which might have been properly given; to warrant reversal of a judgment for an erroneous instruction, the court must be satisfied that the jury was misled; the refusal to give a proper
instruction which would have availed the party nothing is harmless error.” (quoting Gallagher v. Fed. Ins. Co., 346 So. 2d 95, 97 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977))).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Wal-Mart Stores E., LP v. Johnson (Fla. 2d DCA 2026)
Authorities Cited
- Mark N. Goldschmidt, M.D. v. Jerri Taletha Holman, 571 So. 2d 422 (Fla. 1990)
- Gallagher v. Fed. Ins. Co., 346 So. 2d 95 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Gonzalez v. Rose, 752 So. 2d 39 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000)
- Cruz v. Gustavo Plasencia, M.D., 778 So. 2d 458 (Fla. 3d DCA 2001)