SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, A CORPORATION, AND ROBERT J. SCHMIDT, PETITIONERS,

v.

ART A. MAGNUSON, JR., RESPONDENT

Citator

Cited By

• Amjad Munim, M.D., P.A. v. George Azar, M.D., 648 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 4th DCA 1994)
  …tandard of review we must utilize is whether there is substantial, competent evidence to support the verdict. Antonelli v. Neumann, 537 So. 2d 1027 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988). In Punkar v. King Plastic Corp., 290 So. 2d 505, 507 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 297 So. 2d 30 (Fla.1974), the court articulated the standard of review in an employment relationship: [W]hether an employee has breached the terms of his employment contract in such a substantial degree as to justify his discharge is generally a question of fact…
• Smith v. Austin Dev. Co., 538 So. 2d 128 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989)
  …erefore, since the lessor did not carry its burden of proving restoration damages, these damages should not have been awarded and must be stricken from the final judgment. See Punkar v. King Plastic Corp., 290 So. 2d 505 (Fla. 2d DCA), cert. denied, 297 So. 2d 30 (1974); Smith v. Designers Indus., Inc., 109 So. 2d 776 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959). We, accordingly, remand with instructions to enter an amended final judgment omitting any award for restoration damages and including an award of prejudgment interest. AFF…
• Teichner & Mella, P.A. v. Patrice Butler, 600 So. 2d 507 (Fla. 3d DCA 1992)
  …ntiary error, if any, was entirely harmless. See DiGuilio v. State, 491 So. 2d 1129, 1139 (Fla.1986); Tollefson v. State, 525 So. 2d 957, 961 (Fla. 1st DCA1988); Seaboard Coast Line R.R. v. Magnuson, 288 So. 2d 302, 303 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 297 So. 2d 30 (Fla.1974); Stecher v. Pomeroy, 244 So. 2d 488 (Fla. 4th DCA), writ discharged, 253 So. 2d 421 [*509] (Fla.1971); § 59.041, Fla.Stat. (1989). The second of the claimed evidentiary errors presents, in our view, no error at all. First Federal Sav. & L…

Authorities Cited

• Seaboard Coast Line R.R. Co. & Robert J. Schmidt v. Art A. Magnuson, 288 So. 2d 302 (Fla. 4th DCA 1974)