Lane v. Hearin

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Lane v. Hearin

148 So. 2d 539

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 15, 1963

DocketNo. 62-293

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 148 So. 2d 539 (Lane v. Hearin) 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

Lane v. Hearin, 148 So. 2d 539 (Fla. Ct. App. 1963).

Pincite

Opinion

HENDRY, Judge.

The primary issue raised by this appeal is whether the trial judge, upon stipulation by counsel for the respective parties, had the right to question a jury to determine what they intended by their verdict and to [540]*540amend their verdict in their presence in accordance with their stated intention.

We hold that where a jury verdict is not clear and the parties to such litigation stipulate to an expression of intent by the' jury and the trial judge amends their verdict in their presence to conform to that expression of intent, no error is committed. See Tobin v. Garry, Fla.App.1961, 127 So.2d 698.

The other points raised by the appellants have also been considered and we find them to be without merit. Accordingly, the judgment appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.

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

HENDRY, Judge.

The primary issue raised by this appeal is whether the trial judge, upon stipulation by counsel for the respective parties, had the right to question a jury to determine what they intended by their verdict and to [540]*540amend their verdict in their presence in accordance with their stated intention.

We hold that where a jury verdict is not clear and the parties to such litigation stipulate to an expression of intent by the' jury and the trial judge amends their verdict in their presence to conform to that expression of intent, no error is committed. See Tobin v. Garry, Fla.App.1961, 127 So.2d 698.

The other points raised by the appellants have also been considered and we find them to be without merit. Accordingly, the judgment appealed is affirmed.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

148 So. 2d 539, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/lane-v-hearin-fladistctapp-1963.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack