G. Lloyd Preacher & Co. v. Sarasota Bay Hotel Co.

150 So. 590, 112 Fla. 432, 1933 Fla. LEXIS 2263
Supreme Court of Florida·Decided October 20, 1933·Published·Cited by 4 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam.

In this case the writ of error is to an. order granting a new trial to the defendant against whom a verdict was returned in an action at law.

Where the trial court grants a new trial upon a motion containing several grounds, without stating any ground upon: which the ruling was based, the order will be affirmed if any ground of the motion is sufficient to authorize the granting of the new trial. And it must be assumed that the trial judge based the order on grounds stated in the motion that *433 warranted a new trial. See Scott v. National City Bank, 107 Fla. 818, 146 Sou. Rep. 573. On authority of the case just cited, the order granting a new trial here appealed from should be affirmed and it is so ordered.

Affirmed.

Davis, C. J., and Whitfield, Terrell, Brown and Buford, J. J., concur

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

G. Lloyd Preacher & Co. v. Sarasota Bay Hotel Co., 150 So. 590, 112 Fla. 432, 1933 Fla. LEXIS 2263 (Fla. 1933).

150 So. 590 (G. Lloyd Preacher & Co. v. Sarasota Bay Hotel Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hart, Et Vir v. Held
5 So. 2d 878 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1941)
Kight v. American Eagle Fire Insurance
179 So. 792 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1938)
Motor Transit Co. v. Studstill
176 So. 769 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1937)
Beckwith v. Bailey
161 So. 576 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1935)