KRISIA DEL PRADO
v.
OPTIMUS U.S. 801 NW 47TH AVE, LLC, ETC.
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.
A jury verdict is affirmed when reviewed de novo and found to be supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record.
[1] In reviewing a motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict, the appellate court must evaluate the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party and refr…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceKrisia del Prado appealed a September 22, 2021 final judgment following a jury verdict against her and a September 29, 2021 order denying her motion f…
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 Judgment Notwithstanding The Verdict (J.N.O.V.) cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed February 1, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D21-2101 Lower Tribunal No. 19-33861
________________
Krisia del Prado,
Appellant,
vs.
Optimus U.S. 801 NW 47th Ave, LLC, etc., et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William Thomas, Judge. Law Office of Michael Garcia Petit, P.A., and Michael Garcia Petit (Miramar), for appellant. Dimond Kaplan & Rothstein, P.A., and Scott M. Dimond and Lorenz Michel Prüss; and Kula & Associates, P.A., and Elliot B. Kula, for appellees. Before HENDON, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ. HENDON, J. Krisia del Prado (“del Prado”) seeks to reverse a September 22, 2021 final judgment following a jury verdict, and a September 29, 2021 order denying her motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (“JNOV”). We affirm.
An “order on a motion for . . . judgment notwithstanding the verdict is reviewed de novo." Hernandez v. Mishali, 319 So. 3d 753, 757 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). When “deciding the appropriateness of a . . . JNOV, Florida trial and appellate courts use the test of whether the verdict is . . . supported by competent, substantial evidence.” Siegel v. Cross Senior Care, Inc., 239 So. 3d 738, 743 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018); Marriott Int'l, Inc. v. Am. Bridge Bahamas, Ltd., 193 So. 3d 902, 905 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015) (holding that in reviewing a ruling on a motion for JNOV, “[a]ppellate courts are required to evaluate the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party, and abstain from reweighing any conflicting or ambiguous evidence presented below”). On de novo review, we find the verdict is supported by competent, substantial record evidence. Accordingly, we affirm the final judgment and the order denying del Prado’s motion for JNOV.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Krisia del Prado v. Optimus U.S. 801 NW 47th AVE, LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)…llowing a jury verdict, and a September 29, 2021 order denying her motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (“JNOV”). We affirm. An “order on a motion for . . . judgment notwithstanding the verdict is reviewed de novo." Hernandez v. Mishali, 319 So. 3d 753, 757 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). When “deciding the appropriateness of a . . . JNOV, Florida trial and appellate courts use the test of whether the verdict is . . . supported by competent, substantial evidence.” Siegel v. Cross Senior Care, Inc., 239 So. 3d…
-
Universal Prop. & Cas. Ins. Co. v. Gonzalez-Perez (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)
-
Krisia del Prado v. Optimus U.S. 801 NW 47TH AVE, LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)…llowing a jury verdict, and a September 29, 2021 order denying her motion for judgment notwithstanding the verdict (“JNOV”). We affirm. An “order on a motion for . . . judgment notwithstanding the verdict is reviewed de novo." Hernandez v. Mishali, 319 So. 3d 753, 757 (Fla. 3d DCA 2021). When “deciding the appropriateness of a . . . JNOV, Florida trial and appellate courts use the test of whether the verdict is . . . supported by competent, substantial evidence.” Siegel v. Cross Senior Care, Inc., 239 So. 3d…
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
- Marriott Int'l, Inc. v. Am. Bridge Bahamas, Ltd., 193 So. 3d 902 (Fla. 3d DCA 2015)
- Siegel v. Cross Senior Care, Inc., 239 So. 3d 738 (Fla. 3d DCA 2018)
- Krisia del Prado v. Optimus U.S. 801 NW 47th AVE, LLC (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)