Financiera Asociada, S.A. v. E.F. Hutton & Co.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Financiera Asociada, S.A. v. E.F. Hutton & Co.

530 So. 2d 497, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2087, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3922, 1988 WL 91152

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided September 6, 1988·No. No. 87-1626·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Finding that appellant Financiera Asocia-da, S.A., was not prejudiced by the theories presented by appellees’ expert witness, cf Binger v. King Pest Control, 401 So.2d 1310, 1811 (Fla.1981) (“a trial judge’s discretion in determining whether an unlisted witness can testify should be guided primarily by whether prejudice ... accrue[s] to the objecting party.”), we affirm. Any surprise was vitiated by the fact that the question came up long before the end of the five-week trial; appellant had ample opportunity to take appropriate action. Appellant’s remaining points lack merit.

AFFIRMED.

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

PER CURIAM.

Finding that appellant Financiera Asocia-da, S.A., was not prejudiced by the theories presented by appellees’ expert witness, cf Binger v. King Pest Control, 401 So.2d 1310, 1811 (Fla.1981) (“a trial judge’s discretion in determining whether an unlisted witness can testify should be guided primarily by whether prejudice ... accrue[s] to the objecting party.”), we affirm. Any surprise was vitiated by the fact that the question came up long before the end of the five-week trial; appellant had ample opportunity to take appropriate action. Appellant’s remaining points lack merit.

AFFIRMED.

Financiera Asociada, S.A. v. E.F. Hutton & Co., 530 So. 2d 497, 13 Fla. L. Weekly 2087, 1988 Fla. App. LEXIS 3922, 1988 WL 91152 (Fla. Ct. App. 1988).

Pincite

530 So. 2d 497 (Financiera Asociada, S.A. v. E.F. Hutton & Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related