TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Pittman v. Smith

Alice PITTMAN v. Cornelius SMITH

Pittman v. Smith, 252 So. 2d 279 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
District Court of Appeal of Florida · State Appellate Courts
Decided
July 22, 1971
Docket
No. 70-198
Judges
Mager, Owen, Reed
Citations
252 So. 2d 2791971 Fla. App. LEXIS 5981
Cited by 6

Opinion of the Court — Mager

Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.

MAGER, Judge.

Defendant appeals from an order of the trial judge granting plaintiff’s motion for a new trial after a jury verdict in favor of the defendant based upon the judge’s finding that the verdict of the jury was contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. We affirm.

Contentions similar to those raised by the defendant in this appeal were considered in Cloud v. Fallis, Fla.1959, 110 So.2d 669 . There the Supreme Court of Florida held that it was the duty of the trial judge to grant a new trial if he concludes that the verdict is against the manifest weight of the evidence; and he should always do so if the jury has been deceived as to the force and credibility of the evidence or it has been influenced by considerations outside the record. The trial judge by virtue of his close contact with the trial stands in a unique position in that he has the opportunity to better understand the ultimate decision of the jurors and is in a much better position than an appellate court to pass upon the ultimate correctness of the jury’s verdict.

Therefore, the trial court has a very broad and liberal discretion in ruling on a motion for a new trial and such determination will not be disturbed except on a clear showing of abuse. The burden rests upon the appellant to make such error clearly appear. In the case sub judice the defendant has failed to sustain this burden.

Affirmed.

REED, C. J., and OWEN, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

Cited by 6 cases

View all citing references →
1972: 11973: 31974: 11977: 119722026peak 1973 · 3

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Weems v. Dawson352 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)
  2. Peninsular Life Insurance Company v. Hanratty281 So. 2d 609 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)
  3. B. W. Butler, Inc. v. Anderman279 So. 2d 907 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973) · Dissent
  4. Lyman v. Fanta290 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)
  5. Russell v. Edgerton36 Fla. Supp. 207 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Seminole Cty. 1972)
  6. Horner v. Modern Movers, Inc.274 So. 2d 8 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)

Most recent

  1. Weems v. Dawson352 So. 2d 1196 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1977)
  2. Lyman v. Fanta290 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1974)
  3. Peninsular Life Insurance Company v. Hanratty281 So. 2d 609 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)
  4. B. W. Butler, Inc. v. Anderman279 So. 2d 907 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973) · Dissent
  5. Horner v. Modern Movers, Inc.274 So. 2d 8 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1973)
  6. Russell v. Edgerton36 Fla. Supp. 207 (Fla. Cir. Ct., Seminole Cty. 1972)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 1

DepthCaseCited by
Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So. 2d 669 (Fla. 1959) 468

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list