IRENEO RACOMA, JR., M.D., AND FRANKLIN, FAVATA & HULLS, M.D.'S, P.A., APPELLANTS,
v.
STEFFAN L. HANNANS, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Ireneo Racoma, Jr., M.D., and Franklin, Favata & Hulls, M.D.’s, P.A., appeal from the order granting Steffan L. Hannans a new trial after a jury rendered a verdict in favor of Dr. Racoma in an action for medical malpractice. We conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in ordering a new trial, and accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to the trial court to reinstate the jury’s verdict. See § 59.041, Fla. Stat. (2005) (stating that “[n]o judgment shall be set aside or reversed, or new trial granted by any court of the state in any cause ... unless in the opinion of the court ... after an examination of the entire case it shall appear that the error complained of has resulted in a miscarriage of justice.”).
Reversed and remanded.
FULMER, SILBERMAN, and KELLY, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (14 total)
-
Prime Homes, Inc. v. Pine Lake, LLC, 84 So. 3d 1147 (Fla. 4th DCA 2012)…quires parties to interpret the language in two or more possible ways. Id. If the terms of the contract are unambiguous, “the court is bound by the plain meaning of those terms.” Emerald Pointe Prop. Owners’ Ass’n v. Commercial Constr. Indus., Inc., 978 So. 2d 873, 877 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). Parol evidence is inadmissible to contradict, vary, or modify terms which are unambiguously contained within a written agreement. See Leaseco, Inc. v. Bartlett, 257 So. 2d 629, 632 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971). Failure to dictate t…
-
Landmark Am. Ins. Co. v. Pin-Pon Corp. & Lexington Ins. Co., 155 So. 3d 432 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015)…ed, extended, or modified by ... any rider or endorsement thereto.” If the terms of a contract are clear and unambiguous, the court is bound by the plain meaning of those terms. Emerald Pointe Prop. Owners’ Ass’n v. Commercial Constr. Indus., Inc., 978 So. 2d 873, 877 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008). Thus, where a contract is unambiguous, the parties’ intent must be gleaned from “the four corners of the document.” Dows v. Nike, Inc., 846 So. 2d 595, 601 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). “In the absence of ambiguity, the language its…
-
Levy v. Eliahu Ben-Shmuel, 255 So. 3d 493 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)…party [*496] a new trial or hearing on remand in order to remedy the shortcoming and try again. (citing Persinger v. Estate of Tibbetts, 727 So. 2d 350, 351 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999) ; Emerald Pointe Prop. Owners' Ass'n v. Commercial Constr. Indus. Inc., 978 So. 2d 873, 879-80 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) ). See also Martinez v. Reemployment Assistance Appeals Com'n, 118 So. 3d 878 (Fla. 3d DCA 2013). The Fourth District, applying this general rule, has held that a party who fails to meet its burden of establishing damage…
Previewing 3 of 14 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence