STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
v.
KAREN GARCIA, APPELLEE
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANT,
KAREN GARCIA, APPELLEE
621 So. 2d 475
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1993)
Caution
Cited by 44 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
At the time the trial court ordered a new trial on the grounds that the jury verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence, it did not have the benefit of the recent Florida Supreme Court opinion Easkold v. Rhodes, 614 So. 2d 495 (Fla.1993). The Easkold court held that the jury could properly reach a finding contrary to uncon-tradicted expert witness testimony. Therefore, we reverse and remand with instructions to the trial court to enter a judgment for Appellant in accordance with the jury verdict.
STONE and FARMER, JJ. and MAY, MELANIE, Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (22 total)
-
Hutchinson v. State, 882 So. 2d 943 (Fla. 2004)…ements may be admitted into evidence if the trial court finds that one of the exceptions provided for by statute is appli [*951] cable to the facts and circumstances of the case. See §§ 90.802, 90.803, 90.804, Fla. Stat. (2003); cf. Rigdon v. State, 621 So. 2d 475, 478 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993) (“In the absence of an applicable exception, hearsay evidence is inadmissible.”). The State asserts that Pruitt’s hearsay statement was admissible either as an excited utterance or as a spontaneous statement. We disagree. S…
-
Aundra Johnson v. State, 53 So. 3d 1003 (Fla. 2010)…9), on the basis that it expressly and directly conflicts with decisions of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Biscardi v. State, 511 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Huhn v. State, 511 So. 2d 583 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); and Rigdon v. State, [*1005] 621 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993).1 The issue before this Court is whether it is per se reversible error when a judge erroneously instructs a jury prior to deliberations that it cannot have any testimony read back. We hold that the error, if preserved, is per se…
-
Nyka O'Connor v. State, 835 So. 2d 1226 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003)…description of the gun used in the robbery “matched the appearance” of the gun admitted in evidence). On the other hand, where the evidence at trial does not link a weapon seized to the crime charged, the weapon is inadmissible. In Rigdon v. State, 621 So. 2d 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993), the defendant was charged with attempted murder. We concluded that the trial court erred in admitting into evidence a small semi-automatic weapon which the police found under the defendant’s bed. We reasoned that the “exhibit di…
Previewing 3 of 22 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Easkold v. Rhodes, 614 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 1993)