Hutchins v. City of Hialeah

153 So. 2d 864, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3282
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided June 4, 1963·No. No. 62-774·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We are confronted again with an appeal from an order granting a new trial which failed to include a statement by the trial judge of any ground or grounds upon which such order was based, as required by statute and court rule (§ 59.07(4) Fla.Stat., F.S.A., rule 2.8(f) F.R.C.P., 31 F.S.A.). The absence of grounds in the order requires reversal. See Ebersole v. Tepperman, Fla.1953, 65 So.2d 564; Means v. Douglas, Fla.App.1959, 110 So.2d 88; Fulton v. Poston Bridge & Iron, Inc., Fla.App.1960, 122 So.2d 240; Gaskill v. Montague, Fla.App.1961, 128 So.2d 420; Ponte v. Lattin, Fla.App.1961, 135 So.2d 260; Morton v. Staples, Fla.App.1962, 141 So.2d 806; Hammett v. Lyte Lyne, Inc., Fla.1950, 150 So.2d 235. The order for new trial is reversed, and the cause is remanded to the circuit court with directions to reinstate the verdict and judgment.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

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

Hutchins v. City of Hialeah, 153 So. 2d 864, 1963 Fla. App. LEXIS 3282 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).

153 So. 2d 864 (Hutchins v. City of Hialeah) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Hutchins v. City of Hialeah
196 So. 2d 741 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1967)
City of Hialeah v. Hutchins
189 So. 2d 165 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1966)