MARVIN A. HOLLUB, ETC., ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
PETER J. CLANCY, 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 court affirmed the final judgment and denial of post-trial motions, finding competent substantial evidence supported the jury's verdict and no abuse of discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion to amend.
Defendants appealed an adverse final judgment and denial of post-trial motions, while plaintiffs cross-appealed. The jury returned a verdict for the p…
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 Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The defendants, Marvin A. Hollub, et al., appeal from an adverse final judgment and from the denial of their post-trial motions for new trial and for remittitur. The plaintiffs, Peter J; Clancy, et al., cross-appeal from the final judgment. We affirm all aspects of the final judgment and the denial of the defendants’ post-trial motions.
We find that there was competent, substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict. Randy Int’l, Ltd. v. American Excess Corp., 501 So. 2d 667, 670 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Moreover, we find that the trial court properly denied the defendants’ motions for a new trial and for remittitur, and that defendants’ arguments to the contrary lack merit.
Lastly, with regard to the cross-appeal, we find that the trial court properly denied the plaintiffs’ motion to amend their complaint at the conclusion of their case-in-chief where having done so would have prejudiced the defendants. Therefore, there was no abuse of discretion by the trial court. Lasar Mfg. Co. v. Bachanov, 436 So. 2d 236, 237-38 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983); Dixie Farms, Inc. v. Timmons, 323 So. 2d 637, 639 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975), cert. denied, 336 So. 2d 1181 (Fla.1976).
Accordingly, we affirm.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
The Travelers Indem. Co. v. Fla. Rock & Sand Co., 682 So. 2d 579 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)…PER CURIAM. As far as the main appeal is concerned, the record contains substantial competent evidence to support the jury’s verdict. See Salazar v. Marrero, 670 So. 2d 191 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Hollub v. Clancy, 648 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Accordingly, the judgment based upon that verdict is affirmed. In connection with the cross-appeal, we find that the appellee/cross-appellant, Florida Rock & Sand Company (hereinafter “Florida Rock”) is correct in contending th…
-
Hollub v. Clancy, 706 So. 2d 16 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997)…ially pled as a tort case. On the fourth amended complaint, the case was converted to a contract action. The jury returned a verdict for Buyers for $78,381 plus $34,156 in prejudgment interest. This court affirmed the judgment. See Hollub v. Clancy, 648 So. 2d 296 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995). Buyer filed a- motion in the trial court for attorney’s fees. The purchase contract provided that “in connection with any litigation including appellate proceedings arising out of this Contract, the prevailing party shall be ent…1 / 2
Authorities Cited
- Lasar Mfg. Co., Inc. v. Bachanov, 436 So. 2d 236 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)
- Randy Int'l, Ltd. v. Am. Excess Corp., 501 So. 2d 667 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Dixie Farms, Inc. v. Timmons, 323 So. 2d 637 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975)