JAMES HUTCHINS, APPELLANT,
v.
CITY OF HIALEAH, A MUNICIPALITY, AND O. HARRIS, APPELLEES
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.
The appellate court reversed an order granting a new trial because the trial judge failed to state the grounds for the order, as required by statute and court rule. The case was remanded to reinstate the original verdict and judgment.
Yes, an order granting a new trial must include a statement of the grounds upon which it is based. The absence of such grounds necessitates reversal.
“We are confronted again with an appeal from an order granting a new trial which failed to include a statement by the trial judge of any ground or grounds upon which such order was based, as required by statute and court rule”
This quote establishes the core issue of the appeal: the lack of stated grounds in the order for a new trial.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe appellant appealed an order granting a new trial. The order itself did not specify any grounds upon which it was based. This failure to state grou…
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.
We are confronted again with an appeal from an order granting a new trial which failed to include a statement by the trial judge of any ground or grounds upon which such order was based, as required by statute and court rule (§ 59.07(4) Fla.Stat., F.S.A., rule 2.8(f) F.R.C.P., 31 F.S.A.). The absence of grounds in the order requires reversal. See Ebersole v. Tepperman, Fla.1953, 65 So.2d 564; Means v. Douglas, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 88; Fulton v. Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., Fla.App.1960, 122 So.2d 240; Gaskill v. Montague, Fla.App.1961, 128 So.2d 420; Ponte v. Lattin, Fla.App.1961, 135 So.2d 260; Morton v. Staples, Fla.App.1962, 141 So.2d 806; Hammett v. Lyte Lyne, Inc., Fla.1950, 150 So.2d 235. The order for new trial is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court with directions to reinstate the verdict and judgment.
Reversed and remanded with directions.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
City OF Hialeah v. Hutchins, 166 So. 2d 607 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964)…ate a clear disregard by the jury of the instructions of the trial judge. The judgment appealed is hereby reversed, and the cause is remanded for a new trial as to damages only. Reversed and- remanded. . Hutchins v. City of Hialeah, Fla.App.1963, 153 So. 2d 864. . In this regard, see Fisher v. City of Miami, Fla.App.1964, 160 So. 2d 57 [opinion filed January 28, 1964]. . Simpson v. City of Miami, Fla.App.1963, 155 So. 2d 829.…
-
Hutchins v. City OF Hialeah, 196 So. 2d 741 (Fla. 1967)…al was taken to the District Court of Appeal where the order was reversed because the trial judge had failed to state the grounds on which it was based. The trial court was directed to reinstate the verdict and judgment. Hutchins v. City of Hialeah, 153 So. 2d 864 (Fla.App.1963). The defendants appealed to the District Court of Appeal from the judgment as reinstated based on these verdicts. Effect of the holding there was that the amount of liability against the city was limited to the amount assessed agains…
-
City OF Hialeah v. Hutchins, 189 So. 2d 165 (Fla. 3d DCA 1966)…‘Upon the first appearance of the case in this Court, :it was necessary to reverse an order granting ■ a new trial because the trial judge did not include the grounds upon which the' order was based. See Hutchins v. City of- Hialeah, Fla.App.1963,' 153 So. 2d 864. The judgment "was reinstated, and the City appealed therefrom. We held that the judgment against the active tort-feasor (employee) established the limit of liability .against other persons who are only derivatively liable for the active tort-feasor…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Fulton v. Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., 122 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 3d DCA 1960)
- Means v. Douglas, 110 So. 2d 88 (Fla. 1st DCA 1959)
- Gaskill v. Montague, 128 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)
- AETNA Cas. & Sur. Co. v. Simpson, 128 So. 2d 420 (Fla. 1st DCA 1961)
- State ex rel. Peterman v. Adams, 65 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 1953)
- Ponte v. Lattin, 135 So. 2d 260 (Fla. 3d DCA 1961)
- Hammett v. Lyte Lyne, Inc., 150 So. 2d 235 (Fla. 1963)
- Morton v. Elmo Staples, 141 So. 2d 806 (Fla. 1st DCA 1962)