TICOR TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY AND TICOR TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, APPELLANTS,
v.
MICHAEL V. HARBIN AND DEBORAH A. HARBIN, 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.
Florida appellate court reversed the trial court's order granting judgment notwithstanding the verdict and new trial, finding ample evidence supported the jury's verdict for the defendants.
A directed verdict is improper when any competent evidence supports a possible verdict for the non-movant, and the trial court erred in granting judgment notwithstanding the jury verdict.
[1] When reviewing a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, courts must view all evidence in the light most favorable to the non-movant and resolve conflicts in fav…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“A directed verdict is improper if there is any evidence to support a possible verdict for the non-movant.”
Establishing the standard for appellate review of directed verdict motions, citing Pritchett v. Jacksonville Auction, Inc.
Ticor Title Guarantee Company and Ticor Title Insurance Company obtained a favorable jury verdict at trial, but the trial court subsequently granted t…
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 Burden Of Proof On Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
MICKLE, Judge.
Appellants, defendants below who obtained a favorable jury verdict, challenge a final order granting appellees’ motion for judgment in accordance with a motion for directed verdict and granting appellees’ motion for new trial on the issue of damages. We reverse and remand with directions to reinstate the jury verdict.
Appellate review of an order granting a motion for judgment in accordance with a prior motion for directed verdict is identical to that where an ordinary motion for directed verdict is involved. Presented with such a motion, the court must view all of the evidence in a light most favorable to the non-movant, and, in the face of evidence which is at odds or contradictory, all conflicts must be resolved in favor of the party against whom the motion has been made. Only where there is no evidence upon which a jury could properly rely, in finding for the non-moving party, should a directed verdict be granted. Collins v. School Board of Broward County, 471 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). A directed verdict is improper if there is any evidence to support a possible verdict for the non-movant. Pritchett v. Jacksonville Auction, Inc., 449 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Sub judice, we have examined the record and find ample, competent, and substantial evidence supporting the jury verdict. We therefore REVERSE the order granting the motion for judgment in accordance with the motion for directed verdict and granting new trial, and REMAND with directions to reinstate the jury verdict.
REVERSED and REMANDED with directions.
MINER and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Jackson Cnty. Hosp. Corp. v. Aldrich, 835 So. 2d 318 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…dence in a light most favorable to the non-movant, and in the face of evidence [*326] which is at odds or contradictory, all conflicts must be resolved in favor of the party against whom the motion has been made. Ticor Title Guarantee Co. v. Harbin, 674 So. 2d 781, 782 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996). It is only where there is no evidence upon which a jury could properly rely, in finding for the non-moving party, that a directed verdict should be granted. Id. The same standard applies when a court addresses a motion for…
-
Specialty Marine & Indus. Supplies, Inc. v. Bahram Venus, 66 So. 3d 306 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…is at odds or contradictory, all conflicts must be resolved in favor of the party against whom the motion has been made.” Jackson County Hosp. Corp. v. Aldrich, 835 So. 2d 318, 325-26 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002) (citing Ticor Title Guarantee Co. v. Harbin, 674 So. 2d 781, 782 (Fla. 1st [*310] DCA 1996)). A jury verdict must be sustained if it is supported by competent substantial evidence. See Richey v. Modular Designs, Inc., 879 So. 2d 665, 667 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). When granting the judgment here, the trial court…
-
Hunter v. Ward, 812 So. 2d 601 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)…n favor of the appellant on the issue of liability and for a new trial on damages. As the appellant filed a motion for directed verdict, we view all of the evidence in a light most favorable to the appellee. See Ticor Title Guarantee Co. v. Harbin, 674 So. 2d 781 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996)(stating that in ruling on motions for directed verdict, all conflicts in evidence must be resolved in favor of the non-moving party). On September 17, 1996, the appellant was traveling east in the left-hand lane of Atlantic Boule…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Collins v. The Sch. Bd. OF Broward Cnty., 471 So. 2d 560 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
- Pritchett v. Jacksonville Auction, Inc., 449 So. 2d 364 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)