QUEENIE FLOWERS SPEIGHT AND ALVIN SPEIGHT, HER HUSBAND, APPELLANTS,
v.
STANLEY DULIMBA, APPELLEE
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 affirmed a lower court's judgment, finding that the appellants failed to provide a sufficient record on appeal to demonstrate reversible error regarding a jury's zero-dollar award to the husband for damages.
No, an appellate court cannot determine if a jury's verdict is contrary to instructions without a complete record, including the testimony presented to the jury.
“Generally, all instructions given by the trial judge should be considered in the light of all the testimony before reversible error can be ascertained.”
Establishes the principle that a complete record, including testimony, is necessary to review jury instructions.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAppellants, the plaintiffs in a personal injury case, appealed a jury verdict that awarded the wife $2,000 in damages but awarded the husband zero dol…
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 Personal Injury cases and more on FLexlaw
Appellants appeal from a judgment entered pursuant to a jury verdict in favor of Queenie Flowers Speight and Alvin Speight, her husband, wherein a jury, in a personal injury case, assessed the wife’s damages in the sum of Two Thousand ($2,000.00) Dollars and her husband’s damages at zero dollars.
Appellants contend that verdict of zero dollars to the husband wps contrary to the instructions of the trial judge as the facts supported a jury verdict for the hus*834band as well as for the wife. The record on appeal submitted to this court by appellants does not contain the testimony presented to the jury. Generally, all instructions given by the trial judge should be considered in the light of all the testimony before reversible error can be ascertained. Crosby v. Stubblebine, Fla.App.1962, 142 So.2d 358.
As the record on appeal is deficient, this court cannot consider and resolve the assigned error. See Stuco Corp. v. Gates, Fla.App.1962, 145 So.2d 527 and Phillips v. Blum, Fla.App.1962, 139 So.2d 459.
Affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Castaldo v. Singapore, 258 So. 2d 499 (Fla. 3d DCA 1972)…to give the complained of instructons. Crosby v. Stubblebine, Fla.App.1962, 142 So. 2d 358; Clark v. Gray, Fla.App.1962, 143 So. 2d 504; Direct Transport Company of Florida v. Rakaskas, Fla.App.1964, 167 So. 2d 623; Speight v. Dulimba, Fla.App.1968, 208 So. 2d 833. Affirmed.…
-
Brant v. Cora A. Brooks, 264 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 2d DCA 1972)…determine whether or not the trial Court committed error in entering the final judgment appealed. We, therefore, affirm the action of the trial Court. Castaldo v. Singapore, J. F. Inc., Fla.App.1972, 258 So. 2d 499; Speight v. Dulimba, Fla.App.1968, 208 So. 2d 833; Belfield v. Lochner, Fla.App.1964, 162 So. 2d 668; Beyer v. Carey, Fla.1952, 61 So. 2d 373. Affirmed. MANN and McNULTY, J., concur.…
-
B.F. Goodrich Co. & Kemper Reinsurance Co. v. Reeber, 426 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983)…a.1975); Gallub v. Del Vecchio, 301 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974), cert. denied, 314 So. 2d 774 (Fla.1975); Dixie-Bell Oil Co., Inc. v. Gold, 275 So. 2d 19 (Fla. 3d DCA 1973); Garcia v. Lujando, 253 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Speight v. Dulimba, 208 So. 2d 833 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968); General Tire v. Maddox, 372 So. 2d 123 (Fla. 4th DCA 1979), cert. denied, 381 So. 2d 766 (Fla.1980); Russell v. Guider, 362 So. 2d 55 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 368 So. 2d 1373 (Fla.1978); Farmer v. B.F. Goodrich Co., 252 So.…
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
- Crosby v. Stubblebine, 142 So. 2d 358 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)
- Phillips v. Blum, 139 So. 2d 459 (Fla. 3d DCA 1962)
- Stuco Corp. v. Gates, 145 So. 2d 527 (Fla. 2d DCA 1962)