C. M. MEXIS, PLAINTIFF IN ERROR,
v.
G. W. COOPER, J. BRUCE SMITH AND A. T. ANDERSON, DEFENDANTS IN ERROR
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 Florida Supreme Court reversed a directed verdict for the defendants in a suit on a bond from a distress proceeding, finding that there was substantial evidence that could have supported a verdict for the plaintiff.
No, the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the defendants because the record contained substantial evidence that, if believed by the jury, would have warranted a verdict for the plaintiff.
“There is substantial evidence disclosed by the record which, if believed by the jury, would have warranted the jury in returning a verdict for some amount in favor of the plaintiff and, therefore, the assignment of error based upon the action of the court in directing a verdict for the defendants is well taken.”
Establishes the basis for reversing the directed verdict.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThis case involved a suit on a bond that originated from a distress proceeding. At the conclusion of all testimony, the trial court directed a verdict…
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 Suit On A Bond cases and more on FLexlaw
— This was a suit on a bond executed by the plaintiff in a distress proceeding.
At the close of the testimony the court directed a verdict in favor of the defendants.' Upon this action of the court is based one -of the assignments of error.
There is substantial evidence disclosed by the record which, if believed by the jury, would have warranted the jury in returning a verdict for some amount in favor of the plaintiff and, therefore, the assignment of error based upon the action of the court in directing a verdict for the defendants is well taken.
The judgment should be reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial. It is so ordered.
Reversed and remanded.
Whitfield, P. J., and Strum, J., concur.
Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. j;, concur in the opinion and judgment.