JACKSONVILLE NATIONAL BANK, AS TRUSTEE UNDER TRUST NO. 0003, LAKE PALM JOINT VENTURE, AS BENEFICIARY, APPELLANT/CROSS APPELLEE,
v.
J-MARK DEVELOPMENT CORP., ET AL., APPELLEES/CROSS APPELLANTS
PER CURIAM.
This cause is affirmed in all respects except for the damages award which we overturn.
The trial judge rejected the shopping center owner’s testimony about the monthly tap-in fees, supposedly predicated on tap-ins to other water mains in the neighborhood, and based this rejection on his own gut reaction that the fees testified to were unconscionable and exorbitant. In their place he chose his own version of what would be fair and reasonable tap-in fees, without any evidence in the record to support his choice. This was error. In consequence, we reverse the amount of the award and remand this cause for a new trial on the damages issue.
In all other respects, this cause is affirmed.
AFFIRMED IN PART AND REVERSED IN PART.
HERSEY, C.J., and LETTS and HURLEY, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
T.S.R. v. State, 596 So. 2d 766 (Fla. 5th DCA 1992)…irect physical evidence linking the defendant to the crimes the finder of fact has the right to infer guilt of theft from the unexplained possession of recently stolen goods. S.P.L. v. State, 512 So. 2d 1153, 1154 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); N.C. v. State, 478 So. 2d 1142, 1144 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); State v. Young, 217 So. 2d 567, 570 (Fla.1968), cert. denied, 396 U.S. 853, 90 S.Ct. 112, 24 L.Ed.2d 101 (1969), citing Williams v. State, 40 Fla. 480, 25 So. 143 (1898). Section 812.022(2), Florida Statutes, provides that…
-
Jackson v. State, 736 So. 2d 77 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999)…ing which is necessary for the inference of guilty knowledge to be justified. See S.B. v. State, 555 So. 2d 407 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989); State v. Grimmage, 522 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988) (involving five days between theft and recovery); N.C. v. State, 478 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Burroughs v. State, 221 So. 2d 159 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). The state’s argument is based on the McDonald line of cases. Ill Over time, Florida common law developed a different rule of circumstantial evidence in cases where the cha…
-
Donnie Smith v. State, 742 So. 2d 352 (Fla. 5th DCA 1999)…obee v. State, 488 So. 2d 595 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The statutory presumption, standing alone, is sufficient to sustain the conviction. T.S.R. However, the possession must be unexplained or the explanation given must be unsatisfactory. N.C. v. State, 478 So. 2d 1142 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985). The reasonableness of the defendant’s explanation is generally a question of fact for the jury. Boone v. State, 711 So. 2d 594, 596 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998); Coleman v. State, 466 So. 2d 395, 397 (Fla. 2d DCA 1985). But where a reas…
Previewing 3 of 10 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence