Alvarez v. Jones

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Alvarez v. Jones

550 So. 2d 555, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2507, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6001, 1989 WL 125983

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 26, 1989

DocketNo. 88-2444

StatusPublished

This text of 550 So. 2d 555 (Alvarez v. Jones) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Alvarez v. Jones, 550 So. 2d 555, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2507, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6001, 1989 WL 125983 (Fla. Ct. App. 1989).

Pincite

Opinion

COBB, Judge.

Having carefully reviewed the record and arguments of counsel, we find no merit to appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the appel-lees. A directed verdict is proper when the record conclusively shows an absence of facts or inferences from facts to support a jury verdict. Hartnett v. Fowler, 94 So.2d 724 (Fla.1957); Holmes v. Don Medley Chevrolet, Inc., 468 So.2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Ferber v. Orange Blossom Center, Inc., 388 So.2d 1074 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).

On cross-appeal, appellees Schill and Snyder correctly state that the trial court erred when it failed to consider their costs as the “party recovering judgment” pursuant to section 57.041(1), Florida Statutes (1987). See Hendry Tractor Co. v. Fernandez, 432 So.2d 1315 (Fla.1983).

Accordingly, this cause is reversed and remanded to the trial court for the purpose [556]*556of taxing costs in favor of Schill and Snyder. In all other respects, the final judgment in favor of the appellees is affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.

DANIEL, C.J., and COWART, J., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

COBB, Judge.

Having carefully reviewed the record and arguments of counsel, we find no merit to appellant’s contention that the trial court erred in directing a verdict for the appel-lees. A directed verdict is proper when the record conclusively shows an absence of facts or inferences from facts to support a jury verdict. Hartnett v. Fowler, 94 So.2d 724 (Fla.1957); Holmes v. Don Medley Chevrolet, Inc., 468 So.2d 552 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985); Ferber v. Orange Blossom Center, Inc., 388 So.2d 1074 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980).

On cross-appeal, appellees Schill and Snyder correctly state that the trial court erred when it failed to consider their costs as the “party recovering judgment” pursuant to section 57.041(1), Florida Statutes (1987). See Hendry Tractor Co. v. Fernandez, 432 So.2d 1315 (Fla.1983).

Accordingly, this cause is reversed and remanded to the trial court for the purpose [556]*556of taxing costs in favor of Schill and Snyder. In all other respects, the final judgment in favor of the appellees is affirmed.

AFFIRMED IN PART; REVERSED IN PART; AND REMANDED.

DANIEL, C.J., and COWART, J., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

550 So. 2d 555, 14 Fla. L. Weekly 2507, 1989 Fla. App. LEXIS 6001, 1989 WL 125983, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/alvarez-v-jones-fladistctapp-1989.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack