MIRIAM CARAMES AND EDUARDO CARAMES, HER HUSBAND, APPELLANTS,
v.
EDWARD GOLDEN, AS PERSONAL REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ESTATE OF ARMANDO P. BUJOSA AND BANKERS INSURANCE COMPANY, A FLORIDA CORPORATION, APPELLEES

Fla. 3d DCA | 1984-03-06
No. 83-1259
Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.
445 So. 2d 1140 Florida District Court of Appeal, Third District (1984) Positive Treatment
Cited by 6 cases
Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

Although we agree that a trial court has broad discretion to control the manner in which peremptory challenges are to be exercised, see Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Gellert, 438 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), and the cases cited therein, the trial court’s refusal to permit the plaintiff an opportunity to exercise his last remaining peremptory challenge prior to the jury’s being sworn is reversible error, see O’Connor v. State, 9 Fla. 215 (1860); Saborit v. Deliford, 312 So. 2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 327 So. 2d 32 (Fla.1976). Accordingly, the final judgment under review is reversed and the action is remanded for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus

Citator

Cited By

  • ST. Paul Fire & Marine Ins. Co. v. Welsh, 501 So. 2d 54 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)
    …s then sworn decided the case adversely to the plaintiffs. Denial to a litigant of peremptory challenges to which he is entitled constitutes reversible error.” Saborit, 312 So. 2d at 798. The Saborit court also cited with approval Carames v. Golden, 445 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984), for the proposition that refusal to permit a party to exercise a peremptory challenge is reversible error. In the instant case, the record reveals that the trial court’s error prejudiced St. Paul, because St. Paul unsuccessfully…
  • Dobek v. ANS, 475 So. 2d 1266 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985)
    …y was sworn, attempted to use a remaining peremptory challenge. The court held, “The denial of the right to use a remaining peremptory challenge was clearly error.” See also Grabow v. Lehrer, 224 So. 2d 767 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969), and Carames v. Golden, 445 So. 2d 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984). Appellee contends that the trial court did not err because the manner of jury selection permitted “backstriking” by either party. The term backstriking has been [*1268] misused and abused. The term itself refers to a party’s rig…
  • Carolyne van Sickle v. James F. Zimmer, M.D. & Radiology Consultants, P.A., 807 So. 2d 182 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002)
    …has been held repeatedly that the trial court’s failure to allow a party to exercise a remaining peremptory challenge before the jury is sworn constitutes reversible error. Dobek v. Ans, 475 So. 2d 1266, 1268 (Fla. 4th DCA 1985); Carames v. Golden, 445 So. 2d 1140, 1140 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Fla. Rock Indus., Inc. v. United Bldg. Sys., Inc., 408 So. 2d 630, 632 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981); Brown v. McArthur Dairies, Inc., 280 So. 2d 520, 522 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973). The trial court’s refusal to permit a party to exercise it…

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw