GAMALIEL FLEURANTIN, ET AL.
v.
CITIZENS PROPERTY INSURANCE CORPORATION
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
A jury verdict must be sustained on appeal if competent, substantial evidence supports it, and appellate courts do not reweigh evidence or substitute their judgment for that of the trier of fact.
[1] On appellate review of a jury verdict, if competent, substantial evidence supports the verdict, the judgment must be affirmed and the appellate court will not reweigh evi…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“It is a basic tenet of appellate review that appellate courts do not reevaluate the evidence and substitute their judgment for that of the jury. If there is any competent evidence to support a verdict, that verdict must be sustained.”
Court citing Castillo v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., Inc., 854 So. 2d 1264, 1277 (Fla. 2003)
Gamaliel Fleurantin and others appealed a judgment entered against them in a case involving Citizens Property Insurance Corporation. The trial court, …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Insurance Claim Dispute cases and more on FLexlaw
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida
Opinion filed July 17, 2024. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
________________
No. 3D22-1974 Lower Tribunal No. 20-20451 ________________
Gamaliel Fleurantin, et al., Appellants,
vs.
Citizens Property Insurance Corporation, Appellee.
An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Beatrice Butchko, Judge.
Louis Law Group, PLLC, Pierre A. Louis and Alibia N. White, for appellants.
Vernis & Bowling of Broward, P.A., Carlton A. Bober, Ashley M. Arias, and Evan A. Zuckerman (Hollywood), for appellee.
Before EMAS, GORDO and LOBREE, JJ.
PER CURIAM.
2 Affirmed. See Castillo v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., Inc., 854 So. 2d 1264, 1277 (Fla. 2003) (“It is a basic tenet of appellate review that appellate courts do not reevaluate the evidence and substitute their judgment for that of the jury. If there is any competent evidence to support a verdict, that verdict must be sustained . . . .”) (citation omitted); Berges v. Infinity Ins. Co., 896 So. 2d 665, 675-76 (Fla. 2004) (“[A]n appellate court will not disturb a final judgment if there is competent, substantial evidence to support the verdict on which the judgment rests. Indeed, it is not the function of this Court to substitute its judgment for that of the trier of fact.”).