STANLEY VORSTEG, APPELLANT,
v.
EDMUND THOMAS AND PATRICIA, HIS WIFE, INDIVIDUALLY, AND PATRICIA THOMAS, AS PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN OF GISELLE THOMAS, A MINOR, 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 held that the jury's verdict awarding damages was supported by competent, substantial evidence and that the issue of sending a report to the jury was not preserved for appeal.
Appellant contended the trial court abused its discretion by admitting speculative testimony regarding appellee's future lost earning capacity, but fa…
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 Preservation Of Issues For Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
WARNER, J.
We affirm the final judgment awarding appellee damages. While appellant contends that the court abused its discretion in admitting speculative testimony regarding appellee’s future lost earning capacity, counsel did not object to the evidence. As to both future lost earning capacity and future medical expenses, appellant and appellee offered conflicting expert testimony. The jury returned a verdict favoring appellee’s experts’ view of the evidence.
A jury is free to determine the credibility of experts and, where there is conflicting evidence, the weight to attach to their opinions. See Easkold v. Rhodes, 614 So. 2d 495, 498 (Fla.1993). A damages award supported by competent, substantial evidence should be affirmed. See Perma Builders, Inc. v. JBM Assocs., 472 So. 2d 1381, 1383 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); see also Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. McKenna, 726 So. 2d 361, 363-64 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999). We also conclude that the award in this case is not so excessive as to shock the judicial conscience, given the severe injuries to appellee and the future care required. See Allstate Ins. Co. v. Shilling, 374 So. 2d 611, 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979).
Finally, appellant argues that the court erred by sending in to the jury during deliberations appellee’s rehabilitation expert’s report, when the appellant’s expert’s report was not also sent in. However, appellant’s expert’s report was not admitted into evidence, and appellant does not raise the trial court’s evidentiary ruling on the report as an issue on appeal. Moreover, appellant never objected to sending appellee’s admitted evidence to the jury on the grounds asserted on appeal. As such, the issue is not preserved. See Steinhorst v. State, 412 So. 2d 332, 338 (Fla.1982); Lacey v. State, 831 So. 2d 1267, 1268 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002).
Affirmed.
POLEN and GROSS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't OF Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Bogorff, 35 So. 3d 84 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…; S. Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Broward County, 665 So. 2d 272, 274 (Fla. 4th DCA 1995); NCNB Nat’l Bank of Fla. v. Aetna Cas. & Sur. Co., 477 So. 2d 579, 583 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985). . Easkold v. Rhodes, 614 So. 2d 495, 498 (Fla.1993); Vorsteg v. Thomas, 853 So. 2d 1102, 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). . Behm v. Div. of Admin., State Dept. of Transp., 336 So. 2d 579 (Fla.1976) (jury’s function is to weigh credibility and reliability of expert testimony; expert opinion is worth no more than reasons on which it is based;…
-
Martin Cnty. v. Polivka Paving, Inc., 44 So. 3d 126 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)…nting records showed that it was never on standby. The contractor relies upon two other cases for its argument that the county waived its right by failing to object. The procedural postures of those cases are distinguishable. See Vorsteg v. Thomas, 853 So. 2d 1102, 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003) (appellant never objected to sending evidence [*134] to jury on grounds later asserted on appeal); Horne v. Hudson, 772 So. 2d 556, 557 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000) (after denial of motion in limine, appellant never objected to evid…
-
United Am. Lien & Recovery Corp. & Century Am. Cas. Co. v. Primicerio, 924 So. 2d 848 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)…. Consequently, the bond posted by Century covers any delay damages. Century further asserts that assuming there was a basis on which to forfeit the bond, the award of damages was not based on competent, substantial evidence. See Vorsteg v. Thomas, 853 So. 2d 1102, 1103 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Additionally, “[i]n appellate proceedings the decision of a trial court has the presumption of correctness and the burden is on the appellant to demonstrate error.” Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Steinhorst v. State, 412 So. 2d 332 (Fla. 1982)
- Easkold v. Rhodes, 614 So. 2d 495 (Fla. 1993)
- Rahmah Jakouch v. State, 831 So. 2d 1267 (Fla. 4th DCA 2002)
- Martinez v. Tamayo, 374 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Allstate Ins. Co. v. Shilling, 374 So. 2d 611 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)
- Fallschase Dev. Corp. v. Jackson A. Sheard & Oxford-America Corp., 726 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)
- Owens-Corning Fiberglas Corp. v. McKENNA, 726 So. 2d 361 (Fla. 3d DCA 1999)
- Perma Builders, Inc. v. JBM Assocs., Inc., 472 So. 2d 1381 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)