Fernandez v. Silverstone Investments, Inc.

Eleventh Circuit

Fernandez v. Silverstone Investments, Inc.

203 F. App'x 291

Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit·Decided October 31, 2006·No. Nos. 06-11352, 06-13188·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM:

The district court denied appellant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law notwithstanding the jury’s verdict and alternative motion for a new trial on the issue of damages. The court denied the motion for judgment as a matter of law because the evidence did not point so overwhelmingly in favor of the plaintiff that a reasonable jury could not return a verdict for the defendants. After reviewing the relevant portions of the trial transcript, we agree with the district court and thus affirm its ruling.

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM:

The district court denied appellant’s motion for judgment as a matter of law notwithstanding the jury’s verdict and alternative motion for a new trial on the issue of damages. The court denied the motion for judgment as a matter of law because the evidence did not point so overwhelmingly in favor of the plaintiff that a reasonable jury could not return a verdict for the defendants. After reviewing the relevant portions of the trial transcript, we agree with the district court and thus affirm its ruling.

AFFIRMED.

Fernandez v. Silverstone Investments, Inc., 203 F. App'x 291 (11th Cir. 2006).

Pincite

203 F. App'x 291 (Fernandez v. Silverstone Investments, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.