Jones v. Stevenson, 91-1766
| Decision Date | 08 May 1992 |
| Docket Number | No. 91-1766,91-1766 |
| Citation | 598 So.2d 219 |
| Parties | 17 Fla. L. Weekly D1172 Ralph Cecil JONES, Jr., et al., Appellants, v. Margaret J. STEVENSON, etc., et al., Appellees. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
John A. Forgas, III and Harold H. Catlin of Saalfield, Catlin, Coulson, & Etheridge, P.A., Jacksonville, for appellants.
Jeffrey R. Garvin of Garvin & Tripp, P.A., Fort Myers, for appellee Stevenson.
No appearance for appellee Martin Paving Co.
This appeal is from an order granting a new trial entered after the jury found that the appellants were not liable on Stevenson's wrongful death claim. We reverse.
In deciding Stevenson's motion for a new trial, the trial court properly considered the credibility of the witnesses. See Smith v. Brown, 525 So.2d 868, 870 (Fla.1988). Although the trial court expressly found that the witnesses for both sides were credible, the trial court concluded that the jury's verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. This conclusion was error. A jury verdict is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence only when the evidence is "clear, obvious, and indisputable." Perenic v. Castelli, 353 So.2d 1190, 1192 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 359 So.2d 1211 (Fla.1978).
In this case, the evidence was conflicting, but equally compelling in favor of both the appellants and Stevenson. Therefore the issue of whether the appellants were negligent was a factual dispute properly resolved by the jury. Given the court's finding that the witnesses for both sides were credible, we find that the trial court abused its discretion by improperly reweighing the evidence. See Phar-Mor of Florida, Inc. v. Steuernagel, 550 So.2d 548 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). Accordingly, we reverse the order granting a new trial and remand the cause with instructions to reinstate the jury's verdict.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Robinson v. Weiland
...of the evidence when the evidence is "clear, obvious, and indisputable"), review denied, 613 So.2d 2 (Fla.1992); Jones v. Stevenson, 598 So.2d 219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (same); Perenic v. Castelli, 353 So.2d 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 359 So.2d 1211 4. See Brown v. Estate of Stuc......
-
Phillips Buick-Pontiac-GMC, Inc. v. Dallon
...Expressway Authority, 131 So.2d 740 (Fla.1961).3 Smith v. Brown, 525 So.2d 868 (Fla.1988); Kikis; Papcun.4 Jones v. Stevenson, 598 So.2d 219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992); see also, Perenic v. Castelli, 353 So.2d 1190 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977), cert. denied, 359 So.2d 1211 ...
-
State v. Harris, 94-1486
...is not without limits and is subject to reversal on appeal. See State v. Hamilton, 574 So.2d 124 (Fla.1991); Jones v. Stevenson, 598 So.2d 219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992). Based upon the record before us, we cannot see that the instant case is one which warrants a new trial based on the weight of t......
-
Hernandez v. Feliciano
...reasons for granting a new trial were only based upon the weight of the evidence and the credibility of witnesses); Jones v. Stevenson, 598 So.2d 219 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992) (holding the trial court abused its discretion by improperly weighing the evidence, where after the jury found that defen......