DELANO HOTEL, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
LOUIS GOLD, APPELLEE
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 appellate court affirmed a jury verdict for the appellee, holding that any error in excluding corporate books as evidence was not harmful because the same information was presented through testimony. The court also found no merit in the appellant's claim that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence.
No, the trial court did not commit reversible error. Although the exclusion of the corporate books might have been erroneous, the error was not harmful because the evidence the books would have shown was presented through testimony.
“Therefore, the error, if any, in excluding the proffered records was not shown to have been harmful, and under § 54.23, Fla. Stat., F.S.A., should not bring reversal.”
This quote establishes the legal standard for reversing a judgment based on evidentiary errors, emphasizing the need to show harm.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant corporation sought to recover on a counterclaim for alleged loans made to the appellee. The core issue was whether these advances were l…
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 Admissibility Of Business Records cases and more on FLexlaw
This is an appeal from a judgment rendered on a jury verdict in the civil court of record in Dade County. A counterclaim by which the appellant corporation sought to recover for loans alleged to have been made by it to the appellee was tried separately before a jury, and resulted in a verdict for the counter-defendant. Reversal is sought on the ground that the court erred by not admitting into evidence books of the corporation showing entries made incident to checks delivered to the appellee. A question arose as to whether advances to the appellee were, as alleged, loans by the hotel corporation, or were loans by the officer in his individual capacity. The competence of the proffered records for admission into evidence under § 92.36, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., was challenged, and the appellee’s objection to them was sustained. The evidence which the rejected records would have shown was presented otherwise through testimony of the party seeking its entry. Therefore, the error, if any, in excluding the proffered records was not shown to have been harmful, and under § 54.23, Fla. Stat., F.S.A., should not bring reversal. See Tischler v. Apple, 30 Fla. 132, 11 So. 273; Atlantic Coast Line R. Co. v. Peeples, 56 Fla. 145, 47 So. 392; Davis v. Woodward-Crowder Co., 118 Fla. 323, 160 So. 189, 191; 5A C.J.S. Appeal and Error § 1753.
The appellant’s contention that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence, raised in a supplemental brief, has been examined in the light of the briefs and the record and found to be without merit.
Affirmed.
HORTON,. C. J., and PEARSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Massey-Ferguson, Inc. v. Santa Rosa Tractor Co., Inc., 366 So. 2d 90 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)…d trial judge did err in excluding the letter (with which conclusion I do not agree) that exclusion was harmless error. (See Coral Plaza Corp. v. Hersman, 220 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1969) cert. denied 229 So. 2d 867 and Delano Hotel, Inc. v. Gold, 126 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 3rd DCA 1961). See also Petroleum Carrier Corporation v. Gates, 330 So. 2d 751 (Fla. 1st DCA 1976).) I would grant appellee’s Petition for Rehearing, recede from our prior holding, and affirm the final judgment here appealed.…
-
Snook v. State, 478 So. 2d 403 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…he victim’s death in this case. See McLemore v. Alabama Power Co., 289 Ala. 643, 270 So. 2d 657, 661 (1972) (even if error to exclude testimony, error is, at most, harmless where facts were established by other evidence); Delano Hotel, Inc. v. Gold, 126 So. 2d 301, 302 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961); see generally Rance v. Hutchinson, 131 Fla. 460, 179 So. 777, 780 (1938); Corbett v. Seaboard Coast Line Railroad, 375 So. 2d 34, 39 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979) (exclusion of evidence harmless where it did not result in miscarriage o…
-
Monroe Cnty. v. NEW Port Largo, Inc., 467 So. 2d 757 (Fla. 3d DCA 1985)…ge County, 411 So. 2d 1008 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982).1 We have carefully examined the eviden-tiary points raised by the appellant and find either no error, no prejudice, see Bessman v. State, 259 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972); Delano Hotel, Inc. v. Gold, 126 So. 2d 301 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961), or both. Affirmed. FERGUSON, J., concurs. JORGENSON, J., concurs in the result. . We find it unnecessary to determine whether, as the lower court also found, that laches applies as well. As an aside, however, although the pa…
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
- Tischler v. Apple & Finley, 30 Fla. 132 (Fla. 1892)
- Atl. Coast Line R.R. Co. v. Peeples, 56 Fla. 145 (Fla. 1908)
- Davis v. Woodward-Crowder Co., 118 Fla. 323 (Fla. 1934)