GEORGE WILLIAM STEWART, APPELLANT,
v.
STANDARD OIL COMPANY OF KENTUCKY, A CORPORATION, AND JACK PATRICK BYRD, APPELLEES
The plaintiff George William Stewart appeals an order granting a new trial after jury verdict against the defendant, Standard Oil Company of Kentucky, and Jack Patrick Byrd.
A motion for new trial should be granted only in the exercise of the sound, considered discretion of the trial court, and when granted should not be disturbed unless there is a clear showing that such authority has been abused. Cloud v. Fallis, Fla. 1959, 110 So.2d 669. A careful consideration of the record before the court, and the briefs of counsel reveal no showing of abuse of discretion by the trial court.
Affirmed.
SMITH, C. J., and ANDREWS and KANNER, (RET.), JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Metro. Dade Cnty. v. Sergeant Gerald Mingo, 339 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976)…stion of the weight and credibility of the evidence is for the administrative agency and not the reviewing court, even though the court may have reached a different conclusion on the same testimony. McFall v. Florida State Board of Dental Examiners, 173 So. 2d 458 (Fla.2nd DCA 1965); Florida State Board of Dental Examiners v. Graham, 187 So. 2d 104 (Fla.3rd DCA 1966). The court should not substitute its judgment for that of the administrative fact finder who heard the testimony and was in a position to evalua…
-
Jones v. City OF Hialeah, 294 So. 2d 686 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…not required to adhere to strict rules pertaining to the exclusion of evidence required in trials in a court of law. Forman v. State Board of Accountancy, Fla.App.1971, 243 So. 2d 4; McFall v. Florida State Board of Dental Examination, Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 458; Fla.Stat. § 120.27, F.S.A. Appellants contend that the most damaging hearsay testimony introduced at their hearing was a tape recording and written transcript of the tape of a statement by one Leo Vela, formerly an identification technician in the…
-
Forman v. State Bd. OF Accountancy, 243 So. 2d 4 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971)…ay in attempting to arrive at the truth of the matter, and the rules of exclusion of evidence are not applied therein with that strictness which is required in trials in courts of law. McFall v. Florida State Board of Dental Examiners, Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 458, 460; Sauls v. De Loach, Fla.App.1966, 182 So. 2d 304, 305; Odessky v. Six L’s Packing Company, Inc., Fla.App.1968, 213 So. 2d 732, 734. As a final point the petitioner presents the contention that he was denied due process in that the Board failed…
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1959)