FAY S. PAUL, APPELLANT,
v.
RISA BONNIE KANTER AND THE HERTZ CORPORATION, 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 plaintiff could not appeal the inadequacy of the jury verdict because the trial court was not given an opportunity to rule on the issue in a motion for a new trial.
Plaintiff sued for personal injury and received a jury verdict of $2,000. She appealed, arguing the verdict was inadequate and the trial court erred i…
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 Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
The plaintiff in a personal injury action appeals a judgment in her favor rendered pursuant to a jury verdict of $2,000. Plaintiff-appellant moved for a new trial and assigned as grounds therefor eight instances in which she charged that the trial judge had erred in rulings upon the admissibility of evidence. The motion was denied and this appeal followed.
Ordinarily, a party may only appeal from a judgment that is adverse to him. See Peterson v. State, 158 Fla. 406, 28 So.2d 868, 870; Credit Industrial Co., Ltd. v. Re-Mark Chem. Co., Inc., Fla.1953, 67 So.2d 540. An exception is allowed in the instance of the denial of a motion fc_ new trial upon the grounds of inadequacy of the verdict. See Guarria v. State Road Dep’t. of Fla., Fla.App.1960, 117 So.2d 5. One of the firmest principals of appellate procedure is that in order to hold a trial court in error, that trial court must have had an opportunity to rule upon the question presented to the appellate court for review. We find here that the trial court was never presented with the question of the inadequacy of the damages.
If a verdict adequately compensates a plaintiff, justice has been done. If a verdict is inadequate, either because of a failure of the jury to properly assess the damages or the failure of the court to allow the proper evidence for their assessment to be introduced, such a matter must be included in a motion for a new trial.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By (24 total)
-
Rice v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 386 So. 2d 844 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)…in recognition of and in deference to the distinct role of trial courts in the unitary judicial system. See Hartford Fire Ins. Co. v. Hollis, 58 Fla. 268, 50 So. 985 (1909); South Dade Farms, Inc. v. Peters, 107 So. 2d 30 (Fla.1958); Paul v. Ranter, 155 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963). That prac [*850] tice need not deter us from considering freshly raised questions of constitutional law, or any question of law which inheres in the case and may fairly be decided on the record, in appeals from agency action. For…
-
Goyings v. The Jack & Ruth Eckerd Found., 403 So. 2d 1144 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981)…out merit. Second, the issue now raised by appellant that she lacked capacity to waive her daughter’s cause of action was not before the trial court. Consequently, under accepted principles of appellate review, we cannot consider it. Paul v. Kanter, 155 So. 2d 402 (Fla. 3d DCA 1963). We vacate the summary judgment and remand the case for further proceedings consistent with this opinion. OTT and RYDER, JJ., concur.…
-
Tabasky v. Dreyfuss, 350 So. 2d 520 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977)…verdict. However, in his motion for new trial, plaintiff failed to include a specific allegation that the verdict was inadequate as required and, therefore, again is precluded from raising this issue for the first time on appeal. See Paul v. Ranter, 155 So. 2d 402 (Fla.3d DCA 1963); O’Leary v. Watson, 263 So. 2d 643 (Fla.3d DCA 1972). Finally, after reviewing the trial record and considering the favorable verdict for the plaintiff, we conclude that plaintiff’s argument that the introduction of the investigat…
Previewing 3 of 24 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Guarria v. Duke, Jr., 117 So. 2d 5 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)
- Rivas v. Prof'l Prot. & Investigations Agency, Inc. (Fla. 3d DCA 2023)
- Credit Indus. Co. v. Remark Chem. Co., Inc., 67 So. 2d 540 (Fla. 1953)
- Peterson v. State, 158 Fla. 406 (Fla. 1947)