Abuse Of Discretion Standard For New Trial Motions

134 Florida cases classified under this topic · sorted by citation count · see the citation graph · browse and sort

• Hollenbeck v. Hooks
  993 So. 2d 50· Fla. 1st DCA· 2008-08-21 ·cited 11×
  A trial court abuses its discretion in denying a motion for new trial when defense counsel makes a misleading statement during voir dire characterizing representation of an insured defendant as representation of an individual consumer rather than a company, which constitutes an i
• Rivera v. Gaspar Aldrich
  538 So. 2d 1390· Fla. 3d DCA· 1989-03-07 ·cited 11×
  Rivera appeals a trial court order granting a new trial on both liability and damages in a chain-reaction collision case, arguing the new trial should be limited to damages alone. The court affirms, holding that liability was not unequivocally established and the jury's inconsist
• Matalon v. Moshe Greifman
  509 So. 2d 985· Fla. 3d DCA· 1987-07-14 ·cited 11×
  Matalon appeals the denial of his motion for a new trial in a case where he was found liable for negligence regarding diamonds consigned to him that were lost or stolen. Matalon argues the jury instructions on his affirmative defense of Greifman's connivance and trickery were mis
• Boutwell v. Bishop
  194 So. 2d 3· Fla. 1st DCA· 1967-01-12 ·cited 11×
  In this negligence case arising from a child's injury at a motel with an unmarked glass door, the trial court initially rendered a jury verdict for the defendants but then granted a new trial, finding it had erred in admitting the defendants' answer to an interrogatory. The appel
• Hinton v. Supervision Int'l, Inc.
  942 So. 2d 986· Fla. 5th DCA· 2006-12-01 ·cited 10×
  Michelle Lee Hinton appealed a judgment notwithstanding the verdict (JNOV) granted in favor of her employer, Supervision International, in a retaliation case under Florida's Civil Rights Act. The appellate court reversed, finding the trial court improperly added a good faith requ
• THE HERTZ Corp. v. Gleason
  874 So. 2d 1217· Fla. 4th DCA· 2004-05-19 ·cited 10×
  In this negligence case arising from a motor vehicle accident, the trial jury found the defendant not liable despite stipulated negligence. The trial court granted a new trial motion, but the appellate court reversed and limited the new trial to damages for orthopedic and soft ti
• Denise v. Franklin
  759 So. 2d 703· Fla. 3d DCA· 2000-04-19 ·cited 10×
  Franklin appeals from a trial court's order granting a new trial in a medical malpractice case against Jackson Memorial Hospital. The court ordered a new trial because Franklin's expert witness, Dr. Battle, was not qualified under Florida Statute Section 766.102(6) to testify abo
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. v. Penland
  668 So. 2d 200· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-12-06 ·cited 10×
  State Farm appealed a trial court's grant of a new trial in an underinsured motorist case, challenging the exclusion of expert testimony on vehicle occupant positioning, the denial of a motion to disqualify the judge, and the grant of summary judgment on the seat belt defense. Th
• Puerto RICO Mar. Shipping Auth. & Sea-Land Serv., Inc. v. Valley Freight Sys., Inc.
  856 F.2d 546· 3d Cir.· 1988-09-07 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in finding that the transportation service constituted a joint through route subject to ICC jurisdiction, thus Tariff 205 applied and the undercharge was recoverable.
• State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co. & John E. Wilkerson v. Howard
  458 So. 2d 874· Fla. 2d DCA· 1984-11-14 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in granting a directed verdict on the tort exemption and did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial on damages.
• Hinkle v. Christensen
  733 F.2d 74· 8th Cir.· 1984-05-02 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding that the teacher was dismissed due to her union activities, and that the district court did not err in denying the school district's motions for a directed verdict and judgment notwithstanding the verdi
• Slavin v. Curry
  690 F.2d 446· 5th Cir.· 1982-11-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court did not err in denying the request for court-appointed counsel, denying the motion for a new trial based on a post-trial polygraph test, or in its finding that the trial transcript had not been altered.
• Rosenfelt v. Hall
  387 So. 2d 544· Fla. 5th DCA· 1980-09-10 ·cited 10×
  In this dog injury case, the trial court granted a new trial after a jury verdict for the defendants, holding that the provocation instruction was improper because it only covered physical acts directed at the dog. The appellate court reversed, finding that provocation under Flor
• Conchita S. Lewin v. Metro. Life Ins. Co.
  394 F.2d 608· 3d Cir.· 1968-04-16 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the district court erred in granting judgment n.o.v. and a new trial, finding sufficient evidence for the jury to determine the infection was the sole cause of the insured's disability.
• Brown v. Burr-Brown Research Corp.
  378 F.2d 822· 5th Cir.· 1967-06-09 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the evidence admitted was sufficient to support the jury's award of damages for lost profits, and that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in submitting the issues to the jury.
• Springfield Crusher, Inc. v. Transcon. Ins. Co.
  372 F.2d 125· 3d Cir.· 1967-02-01 ·cited 10×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial because the jury's damage award was clearly erroneous and not supported by the evidence.
• United States v. de Marie
  261 F.2d 477· 7th Cir.· 1958-10-27 ·cited 10×
• Kevan Boyles v. A & G Concrete Pools, Inc.
  149 So. 3d 39· Fla. 4th DCA· 2014-07-02 ·cited 8×
  In a personal injury case arising from a rear-end motor vehicle accident, the Fourth District affirmed a jury verdict for the defendants despite the plaintiff's claims that the court erred in admitting defense expert testimony regarding surgical necessity and in denying his motio
• Philippine Nat'l OIL Co. v. The Garrett Corp.
  724 F.2d 803· 9th Cir.· 1984-01-24 ·cited 8×
  The court held that PNOC waived its right to object to the jury's no-damages verdict by failing to raise the issue at the time of the verdict's reading, and that the jury instructions regarding the limited warranty were not erroneous or were waived.
• Barnes v. Wyrick
  719 F.2d 962· 8th Cir.· 1983-10-28 ·cited 8×
  The court affirmed the jury verdict in favor of the defendants, finding no merit in the inmate's claims.
• Knight-Ridder Newspapers, Inc. v. Blanca Nieve Sosa for the Estate of Jose Lanza
  407 So. 2d 916· Fla. 3d DCA· 1981-10-20 ·cited 8×
  Knight-Ridder Newspapers appealed a trial court's grant of a new trial in a wrongful death action arising from the death of a 14-year-old news carrier. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the trial court properly granted a new trial because defense counsel argued to the ju
• State v. Harris Haliburton
  385 So. 2d 11· Fla. 4th DCA· 1980-07-02 ·cited 8×
  The State appealed a trial court's order granting a new trial to a defendant convicted of burglary. The appellate court held that the trial judge abused its discretion in finding the identification evidence insufficient and reversed, ordering reinstatement of the jury verdict.
• Reeves R. Taylor and wife v. Fletcher Props., Inc.
  592 F.2d 244· 5th Cir.· 1979-03-29 ·cited 8×
  The court held that substantial evidence supported the jury's verdict, and thus the trial court did not err in denying plaintiffs' motions for directed verdict or judgment notwithstanding the verdict.
• Renato Lavino v. Jamison
  230 F.2d 909· 9th Cir.· 1956-03-01 ·cited 8×
  The court held that the district court erred in denying a new trial based on newly discovered evidence that could explain discrepancies in property seized by the Collector.
• Philip Morris USA, Inc. v. Cuculino
  165 So. 3d 36· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-05-06 ·cited 7×
  Philip Morris appeals a jury verdict awarding $5 million in compensatory damages to a smoker who contracted coronary heart disease, claiming improper closing argument comments by plaintiff's counsel warrant a new trial. The court affirms, finding the comments improper but not so
• R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. v. Ballard
  163 So. 3d 541· Fla. 3d DCA· 2015-03-18 ·cited 7×
  In this tobacco litigation case arising from the landmark Engle class action, the court affirmed a judgment for plaintiffs Ralph and Maria Ballard against R.J. Reynolds, rejecting Reynolds' arguments that the trial court erred in denying directed verdicts on class membership and
• Tormey v. Trout
  748 So. 2d 303· Fla. 4th DCA· 1999-10-06 ·cited 7×
  The appellate court addressed consolidated appeals in a personal injury case arising from a 1993 automobile accident. The court affirmed the trial court's awards of $1,418,000 in compensatory damages, $20,000 in punitive damages, and $11,905.23 in costs to the injury claimant Tro
• Rudolph J. Frei, M.D., P.A. v. Eve Alger and Donald Alger
  655 So. 2d 1215· Fla. 4th DCA· 1995-05-24 ·cited 7×
  The Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a trial court's order granting a new trial on damages in a personal injury case. The appellate court found that the trial court abused its discretion by granting a new trial when the jury's nominal damages award was supported by the ev
• Willis v. Raymark Indus., Inc.
  905 F.2d 793· 4th Cir.· 1990-06-15 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the trial court did not err in refusing to instruct the jury on the sophisticated user defense or in refusing to apply the Statute of Repose to claims for pre-incorporation exposure, and that the denial of a new trial was not an abuse of discretion.
• Banco Nacional de Nicaragua v. Argonaut Ins. Co.
  681 F.2d 1337· 11th Cir.· 1982-08-02 ·cited 7×
  The court held that the jury instructions properly placed the burden on the insured to prove the loss occurred within the policy period, and that substantial evidence supported the jury's verdict for the insurer.
• Williamson v. Consol. Rail Corp. v. Nashville & Ashland City R.R. Co.
  926 F.2d 1344· 3d Cir.· 1991-02-28 ·cited 6×
  The court held that ConRail did not have the right to control Williamson's actions, thus he was not an employee.
• United States v. Liebo
  923 F.2d 1308· 8th Cir.· 1991-01-15 ·cited 6×
  The court held that while sufficient evidence supported the convictions, the district court abused its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence showing supervisory approval of the ticket purchase.
• United States v. Greene
  834 F.2d 86· 4th Cir.· 1987-11-23 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not err in granting a new trial due to unadmitted exhibits reaching the jury, and that the cross-appeal on sufficiency of evidence was properly before the court and denied.
• Lowe v. E.I. DuPONT de Nemours & Co.
  802 F.2d 310· 8th Cir.· 1986-09-30 ·cited 6×
  The court held that the district court did not abuse its discretion in granting a new trial and that there was sufficient evidence to support the jury's verdict regarding liability and damages.
• McINTOSH v. Flagler Title Co.
  483 So. 2d 50· Fla. 4th DCA· 1986-01-22 ·cited 6×
  The trial court granted a new trial on both liability and damages, reasoning that the jury's award of $26,000 (exceeding the $21,560 claimed) evidenced passion, prejudice, or sympathy. The appellate court reversed, holding that a new trial on all issues was improper when the erro
• Stopko v. Penn Dunlop Farrington and Cecil Farrington
  235 So. 2d 28· Fla. 4th DCA· 1970-05-06 ·cited 6×
  The trial court conditionally granted defendants a new trial on damages, requiring plaintiffs to remit portions of their jury verdict or face retrial. The appellate court reversed, finding the trial judge abused his discretion in determining the verdict was excessive.
• City OF Clearwater v. McCLURY
  157 So. 2d 545· Fla. 2d DCA· 1963-11-08 ·cited 6×
  The City of Clearwater appeals from a new trial order based on an erroneous jury instruction regarding a plaintiff's duty to mitigate damages from a sidewalk injury. The trial court found the use of 'could' instead of 'would' in the instruction was error that could have confused
• Henry v. Jones
  202 So. 3d 129· Fla. 2d DCA· 2016-10-14 ·cited 5×
  George Henry appealed a trial court's order granting a new trial in his tort action against his sister Margaret Jones for tortiously interfering with his expectancy of inheritance. The appellate court affirmed the new trial order, but on different grounds than the trial court rel
• Reffaie v. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.
  96 So. 3d 1073· Fla. 4th DCA· 2012-09-05 ·cited 5×
  In this slip-and-fall negligence case, the Florida Fourth District Court of Appeal reversed a jury verdict that found the plaintiff 80% comparatively negligent, holding that defense counsel's improper closing argument mischaracterizing an expert witness's relationship with person
• Emanuele v. Perdue
  693 So. 2d 1071· Fla. 4th DCA· 1997-05-14 ·cited 5×
  An insurance company and medical service provider appealed a trial court's order granting a new trial in a personal injury case. The appellate court reversed, holding that the trial court abused its discretion by setting aside a jury verdict that found the plaintiff failed to sus
• Kuebler v. Ferris
  65 So. 3d 1154· Fla. 4th DCA· 2011-07-20 ·cited 4×
  In this personal injury case arising from a minor automobile accident, the trial court granted plaintiff's motion for a new trial after the jury found the accident was not a legal cause of injury, concluding that undisputed evidence showed plaintiff suffered at least a neck strai
• United States v. Dunn
  851 F.2d 1099· 8th Cir.· 1988-07-14 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the district court did not err in refusing to allow testimony on direct examination about the lack of physical evidence of sexual penetration, admitting hearsay testimony from a child, or denying a new trial based on allegedly withheld reports.
• Drew v. Couch
  519 So. 2d 1023· Fla. 1st DCA· 1988-01-05 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of a motion for a new trial. The motion was based on alleged jury misconduct and improper remarks by defense counsel. The court found no abuse of discretion in the trial court's rulings.
• State v. Williams
  478 So. 2d 412· Fla. 3d DCA· 1985-11-05 ·cited 4×
  The State appealed from a trial judge's orders granting the defendant a new trial in a cocaine trafficking case. The appellate court affirmed the new trial orders, finding no abuse of discretion by the trial judge who identified multiple grounds warranting a new trial, including
• Seaboard Sys. R.R., Inc. v. Peeples
  475 So. 2d 916· Fla. 2d DCA· 1985-07-26 ·cited 4×
  Seaboard System Railroad appeals a $775,000 wrongful death judgment, arguing the trial court abused its discretion in denying a motion for new trial because the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence and allegedly driven by sympathy and passion. The appellate cou
• Conrad v. Graf Bros., Inc.
  412 F.2d 135· 1st Cir.· 1969-06-20 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the trial court abused its discretion in denying a new trial on damages for one plaintiff due to the prejudicial failure to produce crucial hospital records.
• McDANIEL v. Carlson
  182 So. 2d 445· Fla. 2d DCA· 1966-02-09 ·cited 4×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's denial of a new trial, finding that the jury's verdict was not unreasonable and the trial judge did not abuse discretion.
• Love Realty Corp. v. O'Brien
  162 So. 2d 532· Fla. 2d DCA· 1964-04-01 ·cited 4×
  Love Realty Corp. sued a former employee for misappropriating a real estate brokerage commission. The jury awarded the full $2,000 commission, but the trial court granted the defendant's motion for a new trial, finding the verdict excessive and unsupported by evidence. On appeal,
• United States v. Fancher
  319 F.2d 604· 2d Cir.· 1963-07-01 ·cited 4×
  The court held that the defendant was not prejudiced by the government's failure to call the accountant as a witness, nor by newspaper articles concerning the trial judge's remarks, and that the denial of a new trial based on newly discovered evidence was not an abuse of discreti
• Rolon v. Burke
  112 So. 3d 118· Fla. 2d DCA· 2013-05-01 ·cited 3×
  The appellate court affirmed the trial court's order granting a new trial but reversed the portion that expanded the new trial to issues not raised in the motion.