Isaza ex rel. Isaza v. Yankow

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Isaza ex rel. Isaza v. Yankow

358 So. 2d 1133, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15981

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMay 9, 1978

DocketNo. 77-283

StatusPublished

This text of 358 So. 2d 1133 (Isaza ex rel. Isaza v. Yankow) 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

Isaza ex rel. Isaza v. Yankow, 358 So. 2d 1133, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15981 (Fla. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is by the plaintiffs below from an adverse judgment entered on a jury verdict in a medical malpractice action.

Appellants contend the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, and that the court erred in striking portions of the deposition of an expert witness for plaintiffs. On consideration thereof in light of the record, briefs and argument we hold no reversible error has been shown. The challenged evidentiary ruling did not constitute harmful error. It was the province of the jury to resolve the conflicts in the evidence, and there was substantial competent evidence to justify and support the verdict and judgment. See: Anderson v. Gordon, 334 So.2d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976).

The judgment is affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

This appeal is by the plaintiffs below from an adverse judgment entered on a jury verdict in a medical malpractice action.

Appellants contend the evidence was insufficient to support the verdict, and that the court erred in striking portions of the deposition of an expert witness for plaintiffs. On consideration thereof in light of the record, briefs and argument we hold no reversible error has been shown. The challenged evidentiary ruling did not constitute harmful error. It was the province of the jury to resolve the conflicts in the evidence, and there was substantial competent evidence to justify and support the verdict and judgment. See: Anderson v. Gordon, 334 So.2d 107 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976).

The judgment is affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

358 So. 2d 1133, 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15981, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/isaza-ex-rel-isaza-v-yankow-fladistctapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack