Five Bros. Construction Corp. v. Ferrer
This text of 563 So. 2d 727 (Five Bros. Construction Corp. v. Ferrer) 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.
Opinion
We affirm the final judgment in favor of appellees Haydee and Francisco Ferrer, who were plaintiffs below in a dog bite case. There was sufficient evidence from which the jury could find that appellant landlord knew of the presence of tenant’s dog and its vicious propensities, see Olave v. Howard, 547 So.2d 349, 350 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989), Vasques v. Lopez, 509 So.2d 1241 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); Anderson v. Walthal, 468 So.2d 291 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985), and the trial court properly overruled landlord’s [728]*728motions for directed verdict and post-trial motions. As to appellant's remaining point, Ms. Ferrer diagrammed the location of the incident on a blackboard at trial and pointed out the location on photographs.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
563 So. 2d 727, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 4071, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/five-bros-construction-corp-v-ferrer-fladistctapp-1990.