GREAT AMERICAN INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
JOSE SUAREZ, JR., DEFENDANT IN ERROR
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 Florida Supreme Court denied a rehearing, affirming its prior decision to reverse a judgment due to unsatisfactory testimony, emphasizing that the ends of justice required a new trial.
The court held that while no reversible error was found in the trial, the unsatisfactory and uncertain character of the testimony necessitated reversal to serve the ends of justice and allow for a new trial.
“On consiederation of the record the Court found no reversible error to have been committed during the progress of the trial, but because of the unsatisfactory and uncertain character of the testimony as disclosed by the bill of exceptions forming a part of the transcript, it was deemed and held by the Court that the ends of justice demanded the reversal of the judgment that a new trial might be had.”
This quote explains the court's reasoning for reversing the judgment despite finding no specific trial errors.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe case involved a judgment that the Florida Supreme Court had previously reversed. A petition for rehearing was filed, asking the court to explain 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.
Per Curiam.
Judgment of reversal was entered and filed in this cause January 3rd, 1929. A petition has been filed for re-hearing in which the Court has been urged to> deliver an opinion setting forth the matters upon which the reversal is based. On consiederation of the record the Court found no reversible error to have been committed during the progress of the trial, but because of the unsatisfactory and uncertain character of the testimony as disclosed by the bill of exceptions forming a part of the transcript, it was deemed and held by the Court that the ends of justice demanded the reversal of the judgment that a new trial might be had. Therefore, the order was made reversing the judgment.
Petition for rehearing is denied.
Terrell, C. J., and Whitfield, Ellis and Buford, J. J., concur.
Brown, J.
I concur in the reversal, because the verdict in my opinion was not only not supported by the evidence, but was contrary to the weight of the evidence, and that therefore the motion for new trial should have been granted.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Great Am. Ins. Co. of N.Y. v. Suarez, 107 Fla. 705 (Fla. 1932)…has been several times reversed by this Court and has resulted favorably to defendant in error on several trials had afterwards (See Great American Ins. Co. of N. Y. vs. Suarez, 92 Fla. 24, 109 Sou. Rep. 299; Great American Ins. of N. Y. vs. Suarez, 96 Fla. 865, 119 Sou. Rep. 388, 120 Sou. Rep. 320), we have decided to grant a rehearing on the merits before the Court en bcmc, so that we may be fully advised among other things, as to whether there is any evidence in the record from which we could allow a re…1 / 2