Holdorf v. Charles F. Fry Advertising Associates, Inc.

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Holdorf v. Charles F. Fry Advertising Associates, Inc.

176 So. 2d 381, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4275

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 18, 1965

DocketNo. 4792

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 176 So. 2d 381 (Holdorf v. Charles F. Fry Advertising Associates, Inc.) 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

Holdorf v. Charles F. Fry Advertising Associates, Inc., 176 So. 2d 381, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4275 (Fla. Ct. App. 1965).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

By its verdict in a malicious prosecution case, the jury found that the defendant, Charles F. Fry Advertising Associates, Inc.,, was liable to the plaintiff, Benjamin G. Holdorf, for compensatory damages in the-sum of $5,500 and punitive damages of [382]*382$1,000. Final judgment was entered consequent upon the jury’s verdict; but, subsequently, the trial court set aside the judgment and granted the motion of the defendant for a new trial, limiting the issue to that of damages only; and this appeal by Holdorf ensued. It has not been made to appear that the trial court erred in rendition of the order so as to require the overturning of it.

Affirmed.

SMITH, C. J., and SHANNON and KANNER, (Ret.), JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

By its verdict in a malicious prosecution case, the jury found that the defendant, Charles F. Fry Advertising Associates, Inc.,, was liable to the plaintiff, Benjamin G. Holdorf, for compensatory damages in the-sum of $5,500 and punitive damages of [382]*382$1,000. Final judgment was entered consequent upon the jury’s verdict; but, subsequently, the trial court set aside the judgment and granted the motion of the defendant for a new trial, limiting the issue to that of damages only; and this appeal by Holdorf ensued. It has not been made to appear that the trial court erred in rendition of the order so as to require the overturning of it.

Affirmed.

SMITH, C. J., and SHANNON and KANNER, (Ret.), JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

176 So. 2d 381, 1965 Fla. App. LEXIS 4275, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/holdorf-v-charles-f-fry-advertising-associates-inc-fladistctapp-1965.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack