JOHN WESLEY WARD ET AL., APPELLANTS,
v.
THERESA OCHOA ET AL., 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 while the trial court erred in denying discovery of an agreement, this error did not prejudice the trial itself, but it did affect the judgment.
Appellants sought to inspect an agreement entered into by the plaintiff with other defendants before trial. The trial court denied this request.…
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 Pretrial Discovery cases and more on FLexlaw
On the authority of the opinion we have filed this date in the case of Maule Industries, Inc. et al. v. Rountree, Fla.App. 1972, 264 So.2d 445, we find that the court erred in denying appellants’ pretrial and posttrial motions for an order requiring the plaintiff to produce for inspection and copying the agreement which she had entered into before trial with the remaining defendants.
We conclude from our examination of the record that such error did not result in prejudicial harm to appellants during the trial of this cause. Hence, there is no reason to disturb the verdict for the plaintiff or to grant appellants a new trial.
We cannot determine that the error was harmless as pertains to the entry of the judgment. Therefore, the judgment is reversed and this cause remanded for further proceedings to afford appellants the opportunity to apply to the trial court for any setoff to which they may be entitled under the provisions of F.S. Section 768.041(2), F.S.A. Thereafter, plaintiff-appellee shall be entitled to have judgment entered in her favor against appellants for the amount of the verdict less any setoff to which appellants shall be found entitled.
Appellants’ remaining point on appeal is without merit. Stecher v. Pomeroy, Fla. 1971, 253 So.2d 421.
The judgment is reversed and this cause remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
C. J., and WALDEN, J., con-REED, cur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- In re Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, 253 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 1971)
- Maule Indus., Inc. v. Rountree, 264 So. 2d 445 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972)