American Express Co. v. Juhasz

District Court of Appeal of Florida

American Express Co. v. Juhasz

281 So. 2d 244, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7642

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJuly 10, 1973

DocketNo. 72-1389

StatusPublished

Cited by3 cases

This text of 281 So. 2d 244 (American Express Co. v. Juhasz) 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

American Express Co. v. Juhasz, 281 So. 2d 244, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7642 (Fla. Ct. App. 1973).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

The defendant American Express Company appeals a final judgment based on a jury verdict for the plaintiff-appellee in the amount of $980 for compensatory damages and $1,2S0 for punitive damages. The principal argument presented is that the evidence was insufficient to establish punitive damages because no independent tort was alleged or proven. Our examination of the pleadings convinces us that while the complaint was inartfully drawn it was sufficient to inform the defendant of the plaintiff’s claim that damages for the tort of defamation were sought. See Milu, Inc. v. Duke, Fla.App.1967, 204 So.2d 31. The evidence submitted was sufficient to support the claim.

The appellant’s second point urges reversal upon the claimed impropriety of certain statements presented by the plaintiff’s attorney in his closing argument. The appellant as defendant failed to object to the argument, and the appellant’s motion for mistrial was not made until after the jury had retired. Under these circumstances, we ought not reverse unless the claimed improper statements were so prejudicial as to be incurable by instruction. We find that such is not the case in this instance. Cf. Stewart v. Cook, Fla.App.1969, 218 So.2d 491.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

The defendant American Express Company appeals a final judgment based on a jury verdict for the plaintiff-appellee in the amount of $980 for compensatory damages and $1,2S0 for punitive damages. The principal argument presented is that the evidence was insufficient to establish punitive damages because no independent tort was alleged or proven. Our examination of the pleadings convinces us that while the complaint was inartfully drawn it was sufficient to inform the defendant of the plaintiff’s claim that damages for the tort of defamation were sought. See Milu, Inc. v. Duke, Fla.App.1967, 204 So.2d 31. The evidence submitted was sufficient to support the claim.

The appellant’s second point urges reversal upon the claimed impropriety of certain statements presented by the plaintiff’s attorney in his closing argument. The appellant as defendant failed to object to the argument, and the appellant’s motion for mistrial was not made until after the jury had retired. Under these circumstances, we ought not reverse unless the claimed improper statements were so prejudicial as to be incurable by instruction. We find that such is not the case in this instance. Cf. Stewart v. Cook, Fla.App.1969, 218 So.2d 491.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

281 So. 2d 244, 1973 Fla. App. LEXIS 7642, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/american-express-co-v-juhasz-fladistctapp-1973.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack