STANLEY SKOPIT, D.O., APPELLANT,
v.
PATRICIA NEISEN AND SIDNEY NEISEN, HER HUSBAND, APPELLEES
STANLEY SKOPIT, D.O., APPELLANT,
PATRICIA NEISEN AND SIDNEY NEISEN, HER HUSBAND, APPELLEES
616 So. 2d 505
Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1993)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 3 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the trial court’s order granting a new trial. Since the jury never reached the issue of apportioning damages, any error on the verdict form was harmless. The asserted juror misconduct, if true, was not material to this case, and, thus did not warrant a new trial. See Blaylock v. State, 537 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), review denied, 547 So. 2d 1209 (Fla.1989). Finally, because the trial court should not impanel itself as a “seventh juror with veto power”, McNair v. Davis, 518 So. 2d 416, 418 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988), we reverse the ruling that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
Reversed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Marcos A. Zequeira, M.D. v. De La Rosa, 627 So. 2d 531 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993)…6 The motion for new trial — upon which, with its supporting affidavits, the' plaintiff solely relied below — was therefore insufficient as a matter of law and should have been denied outright. As in the strikingly similar case of Skopit v. Neisen, 616 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993), [t]he asserted juror misconduct, if true, was not material to this case, and, thus did not warrant a new trial. See Blaylock v. State, 537 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988), review denied, 547 So. 2d 1209 (Fla.1989). Skopit, 616 S…
-
Mervar v. Quick Print OF Orlando, 627 So. 2d 491 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993)…as 90% negligent and the trial judge thought appellant was 90% negligent. I suggest it is for juries to decide the degree of negligence, based upon the facts and it is not for the judge to sit as a seventh juror to impose his view. Skopit v. Neisen, 616 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993); McNair v. Davis, 518 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988). After all, if it was appellant who was so negligent, why give her a new trial? Just give the defen [*492] dant a judgment notwithstanding the verdict rather than require appella…
-
Dismex Food, Inc. v. Harris, 194 So. 3d 497 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016)…iced and denied a fair trial because "a trial judge may not substitute its judgment for that of the jury on the matter of damages....” Arab Termite & Pest Control of Fla., Inc. v. Jenkins, 409 So. 2d 1039, 1041 (Fla.1982); see also Skopit v. Neisen, 616 So. 2d 505, 505 (Fla. 3d DCA 1993).…
Authorities Cited
- Blaylock v. State, 537 So. 2d 1103 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)
- Marjane McNAIR v. Donato A. Davis, 518 So. 2d 416 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988)