ELIZABETH GREUBE RIES, APPELLANT,
v.
ALBERT K. RIES, APPELLEE
ELIZABETH GREUBE RIES, APPELLANT,
ALBERT K. RIES, APPELLEE
319 So. 2d 165
Florida District Court of Appeal, Fourth District (1975)
Positive Treatment
Cited by 4 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.
Upon consideration of the briefs and oral argument and after a review of the record on appeal we are of the opinion that the record supports petitioner’s entitlement to permanent alimony in the amount of $250.00 per month rather than rehabilitative alimony. See Patterson v. Patterson, 315 So. 2d 104, Fla., Fourth District Court of Appeal, opinion filed June 6, 1975. In all other respects the final judgment is affirmed.
Affirmed, in part; reversed, in part.
OWEN and MAGER, JJ., and DIA-MANTTS, GEORGE N., Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Montrell L. Johnson v. State, 53 So. 3d 360 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)…COBUS, JJ., concur. . Fla. Std. Jury Instr. (Crim.) 3.5(a) Principals. . A example of an injury that a jury could reasonably find constituted permanent disfigurement, but not great bodily harm, would be a small scar. See, e.g., Gillman v. Gillman, 319 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975) (holding that 4.5 centimeter permanent scar on plaintiff’s forehead could be "permanent disfigurement” within meaning of Florida Automobile Reparations Reform Act); see also Cohen v. Pollack, 674 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996) [*3…
-
Cohen v. Pollack, 674 So. 2d 805 (Fla. 3d DCA 1996)…(Fla. 4th DCA 1992); Martin v. Young, 443 So. 2d 293 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983). Specifically, whether a facial scar is a disfigurement is for the jury’s observation and evaluation and is not subject to determination as a matter of law. Gillman v. Gillman, 319 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied, 330 So. 2d 17 (Fla.1976). Thus, by directing a verdict in appellees’ favor, the trial court improperly removed this issue from the jury’s consideration. Second, the trial court erred in not declaring a mistrial du…
-
Stapleton v. Bisignano, 605 So. 2d 1010 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992)…d lack common sense. A scar on the scalp may be covered up by hair so as to be completely unnotieea-ble. When a “permanent scar” exists, whether it is a disfigurement is a factual matter to be determined by the trier of fact. See Gillman v. Gillman, 319 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied, 330 So. 2d 17 (Fla.1976). In this case the scar was on the face, and the jury had a full opportunity to observe it. We were favored with pictures of the appellant and candidly could not detect it. Therefore, given…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Patterson v. Patterson, 315 So. 2d 104 (Fla. 4th DCA 1975)