Hall v. Reid

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hall v. Reid

681 So. 2d 909, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11095, 1996 WL 604420

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 23, 1996

DocketNo. 95-2165

StatusPublished

This text of 681 So. 2d 909 (Hall v. Reid) 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

Hall v. Reid, 681 So. 2d 909, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11095, 1996 WL 604420 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a jury verdict for the defendant in a slip and fall negligence case. On appeal, appellants argue for a new trial on the ground that certain comments made by the trial judge during the course of the trial amounted to “judicial misconduct” and prejudiced their case. The alleged improper remarks were many and varied; we decline to reproduce them in this opinion because it would be impractical to restate them in the entire context in which they were made.

While we agree that many of the trial judge’s remarks during the trial were inappropriate for one reason or another, appellants have not met their burden of demonstrating at least a reasonable likelihood that these comments prejudiced the outcome of the trial to their detriment. See Crews v. Warren, 157 So.2d 553 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963). Indeed, the majority of the offending comments were neither made in the presence of the jury nor objected to by counsel. Furthermore, a curative instruction was given in regard to one of the comments and the trial court apologized to counsel concerning another.

AFFIRMED.

WARNER, PARIENTE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a jury verdict for the defendant in a slip and fall negligence case. On appeal, appellants argue for a new trial on the ground that certain comments made by the trial judge during the course of the trial amounted to “judicial misconduct” and prejudiced their case. The alleged improper remarks were many and varied; we decline to reproduce them in this opinion because it would be impractical to restate them in the entire context in which they were made.

While we agree that many of the trial judge’s remarks during the trial were inappropriate for one reason or another, appellants have not met their burden of demonstrating at least a reasonable likelihood that these comments prejudiced the outcome of the trial to their detriment. See Crews v. Warren, 157 So.2d 553 (Fla. 1st DCA 1963). Indeed, the majority of the offending comments were neither made in the presence of the jury nor objected to by counsel. Furthermore, a curative instruction was given in regard to one of the comments and the trial court apologized to counsel concerning another.

AFFIRMED.

WARNER, PARIENTE and STEVENSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

681 So. 2d 909, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 11095, 1996 WL 604420, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hall-v-reid-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack