Pyms v. Meranda

Decision Date20 November 1957
Citation98 So.2d 341
PartiesJack PYMS, trading and doing business as Pyms Real Estate, Petitioner, v. William H. MERANDA, Respondent.
CourtFlorida Supreme Court

Malcolm Lewis Kneale, Miami, for petitioner.

Marchant & Perkins and Dan A. Hames, Miami, for respondent.

THORNAL, Justice.

By petition for certiorari Pyms seeks review of an order of the Circuit Judge which reversed an order of the Judge of the Civil Court of Record granting to Pyms a new trial in a proceeding brought by respondent Meranda to recover a deposit made for the purchase of real estate.

The point now here is whether the Circuit Judge, as an appellate court, ruled correctly in reversing the order of the Judge of the Civil Court of Record granting a new trial after a review of the entire case.

The factual situation that produced the controversy is not particularly material. Respondent Meranda had agreed to purchase a parcel of land from petitioner Pyms. Meranda made a binder deposit of $1,000 and executed the purchase agreement. The ultimate purchase was never concluded. Meranda filed suit in the Civil Court of Record to recover the deposit money. The jury rendered a verdict in favor of Meranda, the purchaser. Pyms then filed a motion for a new trial and the Judge of the Civil Court of Record granted the motion. The order granting the motion for new trial recited that the Judge was of the opinion and found that the jury 'in reaching its verdict in this cause, acted through sympathy or mistake; that the verdict rendered is contrary to the manifest weight and probative force of the evidence and the justice of the cause and that the verdict is contrary to the law governing said cause, * * *.'

From this order granting the new trial Meranda appealed to the Circuit Court. The Circuit Judge reversed the trial Judge and ordered that a judgment be entered on the verdict. Pyms, the seller, who was the defendant in the trial court, now seeks review of the order of the Circuit Judge.

It is the contention of the petitioner Pyms that the Circuit Judge, sitting as an appellate court, deviated from the essential requirements of the law by invading the sound judicial discretion of the trial judge.

Respondent Meranda contends that the record in the trial court supports the verdict of the jury and that, therefore, the Circuit Judge, as an appellate court, properly reversed the order which had granted a new trial.

In our consideration of the scope of review available to the Circuit Judge, sitting as an appellate court, we feel that the Circuit Judge was bound by the same rules which we apply to this court in reviewing orders of trial judges granting new trials. In innumerable decisions we have consistently held that trial courts are allowed a very broad...

To continue reading

Request your trial
45 cases
  • Wackenhut Corp. v. Canty
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 4 Abril 1978
    ...a trial court is in a better position than an appellate court to pass on the ultimate correctness of a jury's verdict. Pyms v. Meranda, 98 So.2d 341, 343 (Fla.1957), but superior vantage point does not give a trial judge unbridled discretion to order a new trial. Consequently, to facilitate......
  • State v. Hodges, 62-765
    • United States
    • Florida District Court of Appeals
    • 29 Septiembre 1964
    ...one person fully to comprehend the processes by which the ultimate decision of the triers of fact, the jurors, is reached, Pyms v. Meranda, Fla., 98 So.2d 341. * * 'Inasmuch as such motions are granted in the exercise of a sound, broad discretion the ruling should not be disturbed in the ab......
  • Castlewood Intern. Corp. v. LaFleur
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 29 Octubre 1975
    ...judge 'was in a much better position than an appellate court to pass on the ultimate correctness of the jury's verdict.' Pyms v. Meranda, 98 So.2d 341, 343 (Fla.1957). The opinion below is vacated, and the Third District Court of Appeal is directed to reinstate the trial court's order for a......
  • Bennett v. Jacksonville Expressway Authority, 30990
    • United States
    • Florida Supreme Court
    • 28 Junio 1961
    ...one person fully to comprehend the processes by which the ultimate decision of the triers of fact, the jurors, is reached, Pyms v. Meranda, Fla., 98 So.2d 341. 'When the judge, who must be presumed to have drawn on his talents, his knowledge and his experience to keep the search for the tru......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT