JOSE DIAZ
v.
MIGUEL TRIANA ALVAREZ
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 will not be overturned as against the manifest weight of the evidence unless the evidence is clear, obvious, and indisputable, and alleged improper closing arguments do not warrant a new trial absent a request for curative instructions and a showing of incurable harm to the fairness of proceedings.
[1] A jury verdict will not be set aside as against the manifest weight of the evidence unless the evidence is clear, obvious, and indisputable; when conflicting evidence exi…
[2] Alleged improper statements during closing argument do not warrant a new trial absent a timely request for curative instructions and a showing that the comments were so h…
Previewing 2 of 2 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“For a verdict to be against the manifest weight of the evidence to warrant a new trial, the evidence must be clear, obvious, and indisputable; where there is conflicting evidence, the weight to be given that evidence is within the province of the jury.”
Standard for overturning jury verdicts on manifest weight grounds
Jose Diaz appealed a jury verdict in a case against Miguel Triana Alvarez and others in Miami-Dade County Circuit Court. The appeal involved claims re…
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 Province Of The Jury cases and more on FLexlaw
Opinion filed December 4, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D23-0466 Lower Tribunal No. 21-19782
________________
Jose Diaz,
Appellant,
vs.
Miguel Triana Alvarez, et al., Appellees.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, William Thomas, Judge. Morgan & Morgan, and Brian J. Lee (Jacksonville), for appellant. Wicker Smith O'Hara McCoy & Ford, P.A., and Alyssa M. Reiter (Ft. Lauderdale), for appellees. Before LOGUE, C.J., and BOKOR and GOODEN, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. City of Gainesville v. Rodgers, 377 So. 3d 626, 631 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023) (“For a verdict to be against the manifest weight of the evidence to warrant a new trial, the evidence must be clear, obvious, and indisputable; where there is conflicting evidence, the weight to be given that evidence is within the province of the jury.”); Holmes v. Redland Constr. Co., 557 So. 2d 911, 912 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (holding evidence of a different personal injury claim was relevant because it tended to show that plaintiff’s presently claimed injuries resulted from another accident); § 90.806(1), Fla. Stat. (2024) (“When a hearsay statement has been admitted in evidence, credibility of the declarant may be attacked and, if attacked, may be supported by any evidence that would be admissible for those purposes if the declarant had testified as a witness.”); Araujo v. Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc., 290 So. 3d 936, 941 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“The record does not show that [plaintiff]’s counsel at any point asked for curative instructions regarding [defense counsel’s closing argument] comments, or that comments actually objected to—in combination with those that were unobjected to throughout trial and closing—were so improper, harmful, and incurable that the comments damaged the fairness of the proceedings such that the public’s interest in our system of justice requires a new trial.”).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Angeles-Delgado v. Benitez (Fla. 3d DCA 2025)…o explanation or reason for the request. DCA 2008) (“Reversal of a jury verdict is appropriate only in the absence of conflicting evidence, when there is no rational basis in the evidence to support the verdict.”); City of Gainesville v. Rodgers, 377 So. 3d 626, 631 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023) (quoting Bachman v. Oliveros, 293 So. 3d 555, 560 (Fla. 5th DCA 2020) (“A jury's verdict is generally not against the manifest weight of the evidence if the record shows conflicting testimony from two or more witnesses.”);…
Authorities Cited
- City of Gainesville v. Rodgers, 377 So. 3d 626 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023)