Pladl v. Lifschultz

466 So. 2d 444, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 917, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13407
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 10, 1985
DocketNo. 84-190
StatusPublished

This text of 466 So. 2d 444 (Pladl v. Lifschultz) 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
Pladl v. Lifschultz, 466 So. 2d 444, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 917, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13407 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Reversed and remanded for entry of judgment in favor of appellants. While it is apparent that the appellees sufficiently proved a case establishing appellants’ liability for damages, it is equally apparent that appellees’ counsel failed to submit competent evidence of the amount of damages sustained. We find that the trial court erred in admitting, over objection, hearsay testimony as to an estimate of damages made by a person who did not testify. Without that evidence there is no basis in the record to sustain the award of damages.

ANSTEAD, C.J., and HURLEY and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

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

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
466 So. 2d 444, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 917, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13407, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/pladl-v-lifschultz-fladistctapp-1985.