Keyes Co. v. Rocky Graziani, Inc.

406 So. 2d 100, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21729
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided November 24, 1981·No. Nos. 81-124, 81-137·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Both parties appealing from judgments entered on adverse jury verdicts essentially complain that the verdicts represent an incorrect resolution of disputed factual issues. The appellant Keyes Company also argues that they are internally inconsistent with each other. We may not properly consider the first contention, e.g., Helman v. Seaboard Coast Line R. R., 349 So.2d 1187 (Fla.1977); First National Bank of the Upper Keys v. Caribe Equipment Corp., 378 So.2d 19 (Fla.3d DCA 1979), cert. denied, 388 So.2d 1112 (Fla.1980), and the inconsistency point was waived by the failure to assert it at the trial. Robbins v. Graham, 404 So.2d 769 (Fla.4th DCA 1981); Savoca v. Sherry Frontenac Hotel Operating Co., 346 So.2d 1207 (Fla.3d DCA 1977); Wiggs and Maale Construction Co. v. Harris, 348 So.2d 914 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Crawford v. DiMicco, 216 So.2d 769 (Fla.4th DCA 1968).

Affirmed.

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

Keyes Co. v. Rocky Graziani, Inc., 406 So. 2d 100, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21729 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

406 So. 2d 100 (Keyes Co. v. Rocky Graziani, Inc.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Prestige Motorcar Imports, Inc. v. Zeff
519 So. 2d 6 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1987)
Wolmer v. Chrysler Corp.
474 So. 2d 834 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)