Gauvain v. Wardwell

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Gauvain v. Wardwell

686 So. 2d 10, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3906, 1996 WL 187344

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 17, 1996

DocketNo. 94-03022

StatusPublished

This text of 686 So. 2d 10 (Gauvain v. Wardwell) 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

Gauvain v. Wardwell, 686 So. 2d 10, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3906, 1996 WL 187344 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Mark Gauvain, the plaintiff in a personal injury action, appeals the final judgment entered after jury verdict and the trial court order denying his motion for new trial. We affirm.

Gauvain presents four issues on appeal. We do not address the two issues pertaining to the seatbelt defense because the argument presented on appeal was not timely presented to the trial court. Furthermore, Gau-vain’s counsel stipulated to the jury instructions and verdict form that were given to the jury. Therefore, these issues were not preserved for appellate review. See City of Orlando v. Birmingham, 539 So.2d 1133 (Fla.1989). With respect to the remaining two issues, we find them to be without merit.

Affirmed.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FULMER and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Mark Gauvain, the plaintiff in a personal injury action, appeals the final judgment entered after jury verdict and the trial court order denying his motion for new trial. We affirm.

Gauvain presents four issues on appeal. We do not address the two issues pertaining to the seatbelt defense because the argument presented on appeal was not timely presented to the trial court. Furthermore, Gau-vain’s counsel stipulated to the jury instructions and verdict form that were given to the jury. Therefore, these issues were not preserved for appellate review. See City of Orlando v. Birmingham, 539 So.2d 1133 (Fla.1989). With respect to the remaining two issues, we find them to be without merit.

Affirmed.

SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and FULMER and QUINCE, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

686 So. 2d 10, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 3906, 1996 WL 187344, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/gauvain-v-wardwell-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack