TOLIN MANUFACTURING CORP., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ROY FEINER HANDBAGS, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEE
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 appellate court reversed a jury verdict in a breach of contract case, finding that the evidence of damages presented by the plaintiff was too speculative to support the award. The court remanded the case for a new trial solely on the issue of damages.
Yes, the evidence of damages was too speculative and insufficient to support the jury's verdict.
“Under this circumstance, the cause will not be reversed when the objection is raised for the first time in the appellate court.”
Establishes that arguments not raised in the trial court are generally not considered on appeal.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRoy Feiner Handbags, Inc. sued Tolin Manufacturing Corp. for breach of contract and won a jury verdict. Tolin Manufacturing appealed, arguing the cont…
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 Sufficiency Of Evidence For Damages cases and more on FLexlaw
Tolin Manufacturing Corp. was the defendant in the trial court. It appeals a final judgment entered upon a jury verdict in an action for breach of contract brought by Roy Feiner Plandbags, Inc. On this appeal the appellant presents two points. The first urges that the contract between the parties was so vague and indefinite that it could not afford a basis for a cause of action for its breach. We find that the record fails to reveal that this point was presented in the trial court. Under this cir*715cumstance, the cause will not be reversed when the objection is raised for the first time in the appellate court.
Appellant’s second point urges that the court should have granted its motion for a new trial because the evidence of damage submitted by the plaintiff was so indefinite as to be purely speculative. This point has merit because the sole evidence of damage found in the record is the testimony of the president and managing officer of the plaintiff corporation. His testimony consisted entirely of approximations and estimates. As such there was insufficient evidence to support the verdict rendered. Silcox v. Corsa, 80 Fla. 677, 86 So. 611 (1920); Ruth v. Sorensen, Fla. 1958, 104 So.2d 10.
Accordingly, the judgment appealed is reversed and the cause remanded with directions to grant for plaintiff a new trial upon the issue of damages only.
Reversed and remanded.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Muroff v. Dill, 386 So. 2d 1281 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980)…d point, there is ample precedent for the trial court’s action in granting a new trial upon damages alone. A new trial may be granted on all or part of the issues. See Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.530(a). In Tolin Manufacturing Corp. v. Roy Feiner Handbags, Inc., 173 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965), a new trial was granted on the issue of damages only. Similarly, in Roemelmeyer v. Richard A. Marshall Insurance Agency, 223 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969), where the contested evidence had been offered solely to establish damages…
-
Roemelmeyer v. Richard A. Marshall Ins. Agency, 223 So. 2d 753 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)…ordering a new trial as to liability constitutes an abuse of discretion and reversible error. Holdorf v. Charles F. Fry Advertising Associates, Inc., Fla.App.1965, 176 So. 2d 381; Tolin Manufacturing Corp. v. Roy Feiner Handbags, Inc., Fla.App.1965, 173 So. 2d 714. This is not a case wherein the inadmissible evidence was so closely intertwined with the dual issues of liability and damages as to require a new trial on both, as was the case in Deese v. White Belt Dairy Farms, Inc., Fla.App.1964, 160 So. 2d 543.…
-
Gold Coast Sys., Inc. v. Consol. Eng'g Co., Inc., 376 So. 2d 876 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979)…ed. See Innkeepers International, Inc. v. McCoy Motels, Ltd., 324 So. 2d 676 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975), cert. denied, 336 So. 2d 106 (Fla.1976); Ballard v. Krause, 248 So. 2d 233 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971); Tolin Manufacturing Corp. v. Roy Feiner Handbags, Inc., 173 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965). ANSTEAD and HERSEY, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, ALAN R., Associate Judge, concur.…
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
- Myrtle R. Ruth and her husband v. Sorensen, 104 So. 2d 10 (Fla. 1958)
- Silcox v. Elbert O. Corsa, 80 Fla. 677 (Fla. 1920)