Furr v. Gulf Exhibition Corp.
| Decision Date | 16 July 1959 |
| Docket Number | No. B-130,B-130 |
| Citation | 114 So.2d 27 |
| Parties | Lili Merritt FURR and Walter R. Furr, Appellants, v. GULF EXHIBITION CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
James W. Middleton, Fort Walton, for appellants.
Fisher & Hepner, Pensacola, for appellee.
Appellants who were plaintiffs below seek reversal of a judgment entered pursuant to a directed verdict in favor of appellee defendant below in a negligence action.
We now consider the appellee's motion to quash the appeal grounded on the position that the appellants have not adequately preserved the questions submitted to us for review.
Appellants Furr as plaintiffs sued appellee Gulf Exhibition Corporation for injuries to Mrs. Furr allegedly resulting from the negligence of the defendant-appellee. After the presentation of all the evidence by both sides, the trial judge granted the motion for a directed verdict in behalf of the defendant Gulf Exhibition Corporation. The judge announced that he granted the motion on the ground that he found 'as a matter of law that the plaintiff has failed to demonstrate that the defendant has been guilty of negligence * * *'
The plaintiffs immediately took exception to the ruling of the trial judge. The jury, of course, followed the judge's instruction and judgment for the appellee-defendant was entered pursuant to the verdict. Appellants now seek reversal of this judgment.
Appellants contend that the evidence was sufficient to take the case to the jury and that the trial judge, therefore, committed error in directing the verdict.
By its motion to quash this appeal, the appellee contends that the appellants are not in a position to raise the question presented by the appeal for the reason that they did not request a review of all of the evidence by a timely motion for a new trial. Appellee thereupon submits the view that we cannot now review the evidence on appeal. It is finally contended that the appellants are totally without foundation for their appeal to this Court.
The appellants are not here in the position of one seeking review of a verdict arrived at by a jury after its consideration of all the evidence. This is not a case in which we are being requested to review a judgment based on the verdict of a jury reached after independent deliberations in the customary routine of a trial. If this were the situation our ultimate conclusion on the motion to quash the appeal might be otherwise than as hereinafter stated. See Ruth v. Sorensen, Fla., 104 So.2d 10; 6551 Collins Avenue Corp. v. Millen, Fla.App., 97 So.2d 490, certiorari denied Fla., 104 So.2d 337.
The principle point raised by the appeal simply is that the trial judge committed an error as a matter of law when at the close of all of the evidence he directed a verdict in favor of the defendant.
The two situations are entirely different. A party who seeks review of a judgment based on a verdict of a jury arrived at after the jury's consideration of all of the evidence is not entitled to have the sufficiency of the evidence reviewed by an appellate court unless he affords to the trial judge an opportunity to pass upon the sufficiency of the evidence as a preliminary to the appeal. He does this by a timely motion for a new trial.
On the other hand, when the trial judge has this opportunity in his consideration of a motion for a directed verdict at the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Hogwood v. State
...330 (1941); Thornton v. State, 143 Fla. 443, 196 So. 842 (1940).4 Sheehan v. Allred, Fla.App.1962, 146 So.2d 760; Furr v. Gulf Exhibition Corp., Fla.App.1959, 114 So.2d 27.5 Furr v. Gulf Exhibition Corp., id. at p. 29.6 Supra note 4.7 Rule 2.8(e) F.R.C.P., 31 F.S.A.8 See 918.08 F.S., F.S.A.......
-
Ellenwood v. Southern United Life Ins. Co., MM-90
...of the insurer or the insured's estate since there was clearly no factual issue for a jury to resolve. See Furr v. Gulf Exhibition Corp., 114 So.2d 27, 29 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959). This brings us to the next question whether, considering the commonly accepted rules governing the construction of ......
-
Sheehan v. Allred
...necessary for plaintiffs to have filed a motion for new trial in order to have the court's ruling on this motion reviewed on appeal. In the Furr case 2 this court considered the correctness of a trial court's order granting a directed verdict at the conclusion of the evidence despite the fa......
-
Moore v. Halifax Hospital Dist.
...that such party, as a matter of law, could not legally be successful if the evidence were submitted to the jury. Furr v. Gulf Exhibition Corporation, 114 So.2d 27 (Fla.App.1959). Applying the above-stated rules to the instant case, therefore, the precise question for our determination in th......