WINN-DIXIE STORES, INC., A CORPORATION UNDER THE LAWS OF FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
LORNA STEWART SELLERS AND JOHN W. SELLERS, 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.
Winn-Dixie Stores appeals a personal injury jury verdict entered against it. Although the appellant failed to preserve the sufficiency of evidence issue through a directed verdict motion and made deficient assignments of error, the appellate court affirmed the judgment after finding sufficient competent evidence supported the verdict.
The appellate court affirmed the judgment, finding sufficient competent evidence to support the jury's verdict. Although the appellant failed to make a directed verdict motion (which would normally preclude appellate review of sufficiency of evidence) and made defective assignments of error, the court exercised discretion to examine the record and found the verdict adequately supported.
“No motion for a directed verdict having been made in the trial court, appellate review is precluded on the question of sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict.”
Establishes the procedural bar to appellate review of sufficiency of evidence absent a directed verdict motion
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceIn a personal injury action, the defendant (Winn-Dixie Stores) offered no evidence at trial, there were no controverted issues of fact, and no motion …
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 Assignments Of Error cases and more on FLexlaw
By this appeal, the appellant [defendant in the trial court] seeks review of an adverse final judgment rendered upon a jury verdict in a personal injury action.
It appears from the record that the 'defendant offered no evidence in the trial court, that there were no controverted issues of fact, and that the defendant made no motion for a directed verdict. The only point presei'ved for review on appeal is the sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict. No motion for a directed verdict having been made in the trial court, appellate review is precluded on the question of sufficient evidence to sustain the verdict. See: Rule 2.7(a) (b), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure, 31 F.S.A.; 6551 Collins Avenue Corp. v. Millen, Fla.App. 1957, 97 So. 2d 490. It also appears, from an examination of the assignments of error, that Assignments 1 and 3 have been abandoned. The only point in the brief is supported by the remaining Assignment No. 2, which is bottomed upon the multiple grounds alleged in the motion for new trial, none of which urge any error in the action of the trial judge. Therefore, this assignment is defective in two particulars: First, it fails to allege any error on the part of the trial judge [See: City of Coral Gables v. State, Fla. 1948, 38 So.2d 467; Red Top Cab & Baggage Company v. Grady, Fla.App.1958, 99 So.2d 871; 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals, § 121] and, second, it is a multiple assignment and, therefore, if any part of the assignment is bad the entire assignment fails. See: Palm Beach Estates v. Croker, 106 Fla. 617, 143 So. 792;. Vaughn-Griffin Packing Co. v. Fisher, 141 Fla. 428, 193 So. 553; 2 Fla. Jur., Appeals, § 122.
*252Notwithstanding the deficiency in the procedure adopted in the instant cause, we have examined the record on appeal and find that there is sufficient competent evidence to support the jury’s verdict and the judgment rendered thereon. Therefore, the judgment under review is hereby affirmed.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Baker v. Enid I. Deeks, 176 So. 2d 108 (Fla. 2d DCA 1965)…motion for a directed verdict was made in the trial court. 6551 Collins Avenue Corp. v. Millen, Fla.App. 1957, 97 So. 2d 490, Cert. dismissed, Fla.1958, 104 So. 2d 337, and the cases cited therein; Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Sellers, Fla.App. 1964, 161 So. 2d 251. In both cases cited by the plaintiffs, the error alleged was the court’s failure to enter a directed verdict,1 The plaintiffs also alleged in their assignments of error that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence. They failed,…
-
Am. Auto Rental, Inc. v. Amero, 296 So. 2d 561 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…System, Inc., Fla. 1950, 48 So. 2d 82; Garrison v. Hertz Corporation, Fla.App. 1961, 129 So. 2d 452; Perma Spray Manufacturing Co. v. LaFrance Industries of Miami, Inc., Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 13; Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Sellers, Fla. App.1964, 161 So. 2d 251; Holman v. Ford Motor Company, Fla.App.1970, 239 So. 2d 40; Westerman v. Shell’s City, Inc., Fla. 1972, 265 So. 2d 43.…
-
Balzebre v. 2600 Douglas, Inc., 291 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974)…ble. We do not reach the sufficiency of the allegations as to punitive damages since appellants assign as error only the denial of the general motion to dismiss or strike the entire counterclaim. See Winn-Dixie Stores, Inc. v. Sellers, Fla.App.1964, 161 So. 2d 251. We find no error upon the discovery ruling. See Lewis v. Moody, Fla.App.1967, 195 So. 2d 260. Affirmed.…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Palm Beach Ests. v. Bula E. Croker, 106 Fla. 617 (Fla. 1932)
- RED TOP CAB & Baggage Co., Inc. v. Grady, 99 So. 2d 871 (Fla. 3d DCA 1958)
- 6551 Collins Ave. Corp. v. Beverlee Millen, 97 So. 2d 490 (Fla. 3d DCA 1957)
- City of Coral Gables v. State, 38 So. 2d 467 (Fla. 1948)
- Vaughn-Griffin Packing Co. v. Mrs. Annie R. Fisher, 141 Fla. 428 (Fla. 1940)