General Motors Corp. v. Romine
416 So. 2d 2, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 20135
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided May 18, 1982·No. No. 80-1273, 80-1295·Published·Cited by 1 cases
Opinion
The defendant’s failure to timely and properly object: to the introduction of plaintiffs’ expert; to the use of a special interrogatory verdict form; and to the inconsistent verdict returned by the jury precludes appellate review of these matters. Consequently, we affirm.
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
General Motors Corp. v. Romine, 416 So. 2d 2, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 20135 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).
416 So. 2d 2 (General Motors Corp. v. Romine) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Muss v. Blake
416 So. 2d 2 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)