ELAINE SMITH AND MARK SMITH, APPELLANTS,
v.
ORHAMA INC., D/B/A FLAMINGO CAB CO., 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.
Elaine and Mark Smith appealed a directed verdict entered against them in a personal injury case arising from a taxi accident, along with a jury verdict in favor of the remaining defendant and sanctions awarded to defendants. The appellate court affirmed, finding that the appellants failed to provide a complete trial transcript necessary for meaningful appellate review.
The appellate court affirmed all judgments, finding that the appellants failed to meet their burden of demonstrating trial court error because they did not provide a complete transcript of the proceedings, which precluded meaningful appellate review.
[1] Appellate courts review a trial court's rulings with a presumption of correctness.
[2] The standard of review for jury instructions is abuse of discretion.
Previewing 2 of 6 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“The trial court's rulings come before this court with a presumption of correctness.”
Establishes the standard of review favoring the trial court's decisions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Smiths were passengers in a taxi driven by Joseph Wilner when it collided with a Miami-Dade County bus. The Smiths sued the taxi owner Orhama Inc.…
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 Appellate Burden Of Proof cases and more on FLexlaw
ROTHENBERG, Judge.
The appellants, Elaine and Mark Smith, were involved in a traffic accident while riding in a taxi driven by Joseph Wilner (Wilner) which collided with a Miami-Dade County bus. The Smiths sued: (1) Orha-ma, Inc., d/b/a Flamingo Cab Company (Orhama) as owner of the taxi and employer of Wilner; (2) Wilner individually; and (3) Miami-Dade County. The trial court entered directed verdicts in favor of Orha-ma and Miami-Dade County. The jury returned a verdict in favor of the remaining defendant, Wilner. The trial court granted attorneys’ fees and costs to Orha-ma and Wilner as sanctions against the Smiths for failing to accept a proposal for settlement. We affirm.
The appellants claim that the trial court erred in directing verdicts in favor of Orhama and Miami-Dade County, that the jury instructions and verdict forms were misleading, and that the jury’s verdict was contrary to the evidence presented.
The trial court’s rulings come before this court with a presumption of correctness. See James v. State, 695 So. 2d 1229, 1236 (Fla.1997)(“[A] trial court has wide discretion in instructing the jury, and the court’s decision regarding the charge to the jury is reviewed with a presumption of correctness on appeal.”); Applegate v. Barnett Bank of Tallahassee, 377 So. 2d 1150, 1152 (Fla.1979)(a trial court’s findings come before the appellate court with the presumption of correctness); Lasco Enters., Inc. v. Kohlbrand, 819 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)(applying a presumption of correctness to the trial court’s deci sion regarding a directed verdict). The standard of review regarding jury instructions is an abuse of discretion. Howell v. Winkle, 866 So. 2d 192, 197 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Likewise, the jury’s verdict will not be disturbed unless there was no competent evidence to support it or the complained-of errors denied the plaintiffs of their right to a fair trial and due process of the law. See Helman v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co., 349 So. 2d 1187, 1189 (Fla.1977); Espino v. Anez, 665 So. 2d 1080, 1081 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996); Kennedy v. State, 385 So. 2d 1020, 1023 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).
The appellants, therefore, have the burden of demonstrating that the trial court abused its discretion in directing verdicts in favor of Orhama and Wilner, abused its discretion in the instructions given, and that there was insufficient competent evidence to support the jury’s verdict. As the appellants have failed to submit a transcript of the proceedings below, we conclude that the appellants have failed to meet their burden and that meaningful review is precluded. See Ahmed v. Travelers Indem. Co., 516 So. 2d 40, 40 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)(holding that it is the appellant’s burden to provide a record that will overcome the presumption of correctness as to the trial court’s findings and that “[w]here there is no record of the testimony of witnesses or of evidentiary rulings, and where a statement of the record has not been prepared pursuant to Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.200(a)(3) or (b)(3), a judgment which is not fundamentally erroneous on its face must be affirmed”); 1 South Fla. Apartment Ass’n, Inc. v. Dansyear, 347 So. 2d 710, 711 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)(finding that it is the responsibility of the appellant to provide a sufficient record for review, and that failure to do so leaves the court with no alternative but to assume that the court ruled correctly)-
We, therefore, affirm the judgments in favor of the defendants and the sanctions awarded to Orhama and Wilner on July 28, 2004, in the amount of $12,518.00 for attorneys’ fees and $11,196.00 for costs.
Affirmed.
. Rules 9.200(a)(3) and (b)(3) have been renumbered as Rules 9.200(a)(4) and (b)(4), respectively.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Priskie v. Missry, 958 So. 2d 613 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…personally liable for repayment of Missry’s loan and found Missry was owed $25,000. We disagree with the trial court’s ruling and reverse. “The trial court’s rulings come before this court with a presumption of correctness.” Smith v. Orhama, Inc., 907 So. 2d 594, 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005). “Generally, the rule is that the corporate veil will not be pierced absent a showing of improper conduct.” Seminole Boatyard, Inc. v. Christoph, 715 So. 2d 987, 990 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Three factors must be proven by a pre…
-
August Christine Cave v. Rios, 15 So. 3d 760 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009)…rm the order under review. See S.R.J. v. State, 997 So. 2d 498, 499 (Fla. 5th DCA 2008) (“With no ability to review any portion of the adjudicatory proceeding on appeal, no meaningful appellate review can occur in this case.”); Smith v. Orhama Inc., 907 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 3d DCA 2005) (“As the appellants have failed to submit a transcript of the proceedings below, we conclude that the appellants have failed to meet their burden and that meaningful review is precluded.”); S. Fla. Apartment Ass’n v. Dansyear…
-
Solomon v. NEW ERA Meat # 2, 961 So. 2d 989 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…WELLS, J. Affirmed. See Smith v. Orhama Inc., 907 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 3 DCA 2005) (observing that it is the appellant’s burden to provide a record that will overcome the presumption of correctness as to the trial court’s findings and that “[wjhere there is no record of the testimony of witnesses or of evide…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited (11 total)
- Pitcher v. Schneider (Fla. 5th DCA 2018)
- Albert v. Applegate et ux., 377 So. 2d 1150 (Fla. 1979)
- Helman v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. & William A. Cagle, 349 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 1977)
- James v. State, 695 So. 2d 1229 (Fla. 1997)
- Nuzhat Ahmed v. Travelers Indem. Co., 516 So. 2d 40 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987)
- Annita Louise Kennedy v. State, 385 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980)
- S. Fla. Apt. Ass'n, Inc. v. Dansyear, 347 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)
- Lasco Enters., Inc. v. Kohlbrand, 819 So. 2d 821 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Howell v. Winkle, 866 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)
- Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Cary Kogen, 665 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 3d DCA 1995)