PHYLLIS CLARKE, APPELLANT,
v.
TREVOR STEWART AND SHARON STEWART, HIS WIFE, 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 trial court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial, as the record showed at least some negligence on the part of the appellant.
Appellant turned into appellee's lane at an intersection, causing an accident. The jury's verdict found appellant entirely free of negligence and appe…
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 Appellate Review Of New Trial Orders cases and more on FLexlaw
GERSTEN, Judge.
Appellant, Phyllis Clarke, appeals an order granting a new trial. We affirm.
Appellant contends that the trial court abused its discretion by granting a new trial where there may be some dispute in the evidence. Appellee, Trevor Stewart, asserts that the trial court was correct in granting a new trial because the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
The straightforward trial facts show that appellee had the right-of-way at a traffic intersection. Appellant turned into appel-lee’s lane at the intersection and an accident occurred. The jury’s verdict necessarily concluded that appellant was totally without negligence and that appellee was completely at fault.
The trial court is in a most advantageous position to determine whether a jury verdict is against the manifest weight of the evidence. Thus, after conducting a trial, the judge can, and should, correct what would amount to a manifest injustice. Since the record shows at least some degree of negligence on the part of appellant, the trial court was eminently correct in its application of the facts to the law. Christiana v. White, 346 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 357 So. 2d 188 (Fla.1978); Diaz v. Certified Marine Industries, Inc., 346 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 353 So. 2d 674 (Fla.1977); Kinsey v. Kelly, 312 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied, 333 So. 2d 463 (Fla.1976).
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Power & Light Co. v. Goldberg, 856 So. 2d 1011 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…e ordered solely on the issue of comparative fault. See Morera v. Castellon, 716 So. 2d 818 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Pierce v. Nicholson Supply Co., 676 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996); Kinsey v. Kelly, 312 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975); Clarke v. Stewart, 579 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991).…
-
Pierce v. Nicholson Supply Co., Inc., 676 So. 2d 70 (Fla. 2d DCA 1996)…by the appellants. The trial court denied the motion for new trial, and this timely appeal was filed. We reverse for a new trial because the record shows there was some degree of negligence on the part of the left-turning driver. Clarke v. Stewart, 579 So. 2d 281 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991). The facts clearly demonstrated that Pierce, proceeding forward through the intersection, had the right-of-way. Salazar made a left turn at that intersection. He acknowledged during his deposition that he never had a clear view of…
Authorities Cited
- Kinsey v. Alton C. Kelly, 312 So. 2d 461 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975)
- Christiana v. White, 346 So. 2d 1036 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977)
- Diaz v. Certified Marine Indus., Inc., 346 So. 2d 1211 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)