Moody v. Taylor

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Moody v. Taylor

670 So. 2d 1026, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1737, 1996 WL 82706

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 28, 1996

DocketNo. 95-01101

StatusPublished

This text of 670 So. 2d 1026 (Moody v. Taylor) 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

Moody v. Taylor, 670 So. 2d 1026, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1737, 1996 WL 82706 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Linda Darlene Moody and Barry L. Berg-es appeal the trial court’s entry of a partial summary judgment which found for the plaintiffs on the defendants’ affirmative defense of a prior settlement and also appeal the final judgment entered against them in this wrongful death and personal injury action. Of the four issues raised in this appeal, we conclude that only one issue requires reversal. We reverse the award of punitive damages because the amount is excessive. Upon remand, the trial court should order a remittitur of punitive damages. If the appel-lees reject the remittitur, thén the court shall order a new trial on the issue of the amount of punitive damages. See Hockensmith v. Waxler, 524 So.2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.

DANAHY, AC.J., and PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Linda Darlene Moody and Barry L. Berg-es appeal the trial court’s entry of a partial summary judgment which found for the plaintiffs on the defendants’ affirmative defense of a prior settlement and also appeal the final judgment entered against them in this wrongful death and personal injury action. Of the four issues raised in this appeal, we conclude that only one issue requires reversal. We reverse the award of punitive damages because the amount is excessive. Upon remand, the trial court should order a remittitur of punitive damages. If the appel-lees reject the remittitur, thén the court shall order a new trial on the issue of the amount of punitive damages. See Hockensmith v. Waxler, 524 So.2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1988).

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.

DANAHY, AC.J., and PARKER and PATTERSON, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

670 So. 2d 1026, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 1737, 1996 WL 82706, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moody-v-taylor-fladistctapp-1996.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack