JOSEPH GARRAHAN, APPELLANT/CROSS APPELLEE,
v.
SEA RAY BOATS, INC., APPELLEE/CROSS APPELLANT
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Directed Verdict Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
A directed verdict for the defendant at the close of evidence is proper only when the evidence, viewed in a light most favorable to the plaintiff, shows that a jury could not reasonably differ as to the existence of any material fact and that the defendant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. On appellate review, a directed verdict should be affirmed if, in viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the non-moving party, it appears that the trier of fact could not have reasonably differed as to the establishment of material facts. It is reversible error to direct a verdict where there is some substantial evidence tending to prove the plaintiffs case. Plotch v. Gregory, 463 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985).
We reverse the trial court’s decision to grant a directed verdict in favor of the defendant on Counts I, II, III and V. After reviewing the evidence in the record, we have concluded that there was some substantial evidence supporting these counts of the complaint. We affirm the entry of a directed verdict in favor of the plaintiff on Count IV.
AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
DELL, WALDEN and GUNTHER, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Aspen Invs. Corp. v. Holzworth, 587 So. 2d 1374 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)…nts were ever made. We recognize that Fraser’s testimony, if believed by the trier of fact, would be consistent with his claim that he had authority. However, this is immaterial in a review of a directed verdict. In Garrahan v. Sea Ray Boats, Inc., 569 So. 2d 518 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990) we stated: On appellate review, a directed verdict should be affirmed if, in viewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the non-moving party, it appears that the trier of fact could not have reasonably differed as to the…
-
Briscoe Enters. Ltd. OF Fla. III v. Palm Beach Cnty., 623 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993)…idence, viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party, shows that a jury could not reasonably differ as to the existence of a material fact and that the movant is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. Garrahan v. Sea Ray Boats, Inc., 569 So. 2d 518, 519 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). Upon a review of the record, we conclude there was some evidence supporting each count of appellants’ counterclaim, as well as appellants’ defenses to the action on the note. We also find record evidence of damages that a j…
Authorities Cited
- Eli Plotch and Philip Berkley v. August Gregory, Jr., 463 So. 2d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)