RALPH CECIL JONES, JR., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
MARGARET J. STEVENSON, ETC., ET AL., 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 abused its discretion by granting a new trial when the jury's verdict was not against the manifest weight of the evidence.
A jury found appellants not liable on a wrongful death claim. The trial court granted the plaintiff's motion for a new trial, concluding the verdict w…
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 Factual Dispute cases and more on FLexlaw
GOSHORN, Chief Judge.
This appeal is from an order granting a new trial entered after the jury found that the appellants were not liable on Stevenson’s wrongful death claim. We reverse.
In deciding Stevenson’s motion for a new trial, the trial court properly considered the credibility of the witnesses.. See Smith v. Brown, 525 So. 2d 868, 870 (Fla.1988). Although the trial court expressly found that the witnesses for both sides were credible, the trial court concluded that the jury’s verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. This conclusion was error. A jury verdict is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence only when the evidence is “clear, obvious, and indisputable. Perenic v. Castelli, 358 So. 2d 1190, 1192 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 359 So. 2d 1211 (Fla.1978).
In this case, the evidence was conflicting, but equally compelling in favor of both the appellants and Stevenson. Therefore the issue of whether the appellants were negligent was a factual dispute properly resolved by the jury. Given the court’s finding that the witnesses for both sides were credible, we find that the trial court abused its discretion by improperly reweighing the evidence. See Phar-Mor of Florida, Inc. v. Steuernagel, 550 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Accordingly, we reverse the order granting a new trial and remand the cause with instructions to reinstate the jury’s verdict.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
COBB and COWART, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Robinson v. Weiland, 936 So. 2d 777 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006)…tiac-GMC, Inc. v. Dallon, 602 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 5th DCA) (holding that a verdict is against the manifest weight of the evidence when the evidence is "clear, obvious, and indisputable”), review denied, 613 So. 2d 2 (Fla.1992); Jones v. Stevenson, 598 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (same); Perenic v. Castelli, 353 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 359 So. 2d 1211 (Fla.1978). . See Brown v. Estate of Stuckey, 749 So. 2d 490, 497 (Fla.1999); Smith v. Brown, 525 So. 2d 868, 870 (Fla.1988); Baptis…
-
Ingrid Hernandez v. Feliciano, 890 So. 2d 401 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…y granting contractor a new trial after the jury returned a verdict in favor of subcontractor where trial court’s reasons for granting a new trial were only based upon the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses); Jones v. Stevenson, 598 So. 2d 219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (holding the trial court abused its discretion by improperly weighing the evidence, where after the jury found that defendants were not liable in a wrongful death claim, the trial court concluded that the verdict was against the…
-
Tlo S. Farms, Inc. v. Heartland Farms, Inc., 282 So. 3d 145 (Fla. 2d DCA 2019)
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- THE FLA. BAR RE AMENDMENT TO RULES REGULATING THE FLA. BAR (RULE 1-4.3, 525 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 1988)
- Smith v. Brown, 525 So. 2d 868 (Fla. 1988)
- Phar-Mor OF Fla., Inc. v. Steuernagel, 550 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
- Kendall Mall, Inc. v. Churchill's Hair Designer TO MEN & Women, Inc., 358 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978)
- Hartford Accident & Indem. Co. v. Flechas, 358 So. 2d 1190 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)