Salnave v. Public Health Trust

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Salnave v. Public Health Trust

624 So. 2d 282, 1993 WL 287705

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedAugust 3, 1993

Docket92-22

StatusPublished

Cited by6 cases

This text of 624 So. 2d 282 (Salnave v. Public Health Trust) 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

Salnave v. Public Health Trust, 624 So. 2d 282, 1993 WL 287705 (Fla. Ct. App. 1993).

Pincite

Opinion

624 So.2d 282 (1993)

Arnold SALNAVE and Ramona Salnave, his wife, as parents and next friends of Sylvain Salnave, a Minor, and Ramona Salnave, Individually, Appellants,
v.
PUBLIC HEALTH TRUST OF DADE COUNTY, d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital and University of Miami d/b/a University of Miami School of Medicine, Appellees.

No. 92-22.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

August 3, 1993. Rehearing Denied October 12, 1993.

Friedman & Preiser and Lawrence B. Friedman, Miami, for appellants.

Robert A. Ginsburg and Stephen J. Keating, Miami, for appellee Public Health Trust of Dade County.

Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Strickfoot and Steven E. Stark, Miami, for appellee University of Miami.

Before NESBITT, COPE and GODERICH, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs, the Salnaves, appeal an order denying their motion for a new trial subsequent to a jury verdict in favor of the defendants, University of Miami School of Medicine and Jackson Memorial Hospital. We find that the trial court acted appropriately within its broad discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion for new trial where the jury's finding with respect to legal cause is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. See Baptist Memorial Hosp., Inc. v. Bell, 384 So.2d 145 (Fla. 1980) (standard for appellate review of denial of motion for new trial is whether trial court abused its discretion); Fernandez v. Berkel, Inc., 506 So.2d 57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Garcia v. Lujando, 253 So.2d 725 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971) (appellate court will not substitute its judgment for that of jury where there is substantial, competent evidence to support finding of fact).

We also find that the unobjected to comments do not rise to the level of fundamental error. Brumage v. Plummer, 502 So.2d 966 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 513 So.2d 1062 (Fla. 1987). For these reasons, the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict is hereby,

Affirmed.

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

624 So.2d 282 (1993)

Arnold SALNAVE and Ramona Salnave, his wife, as parents and next friends of Sylvain Salnave, a Minor, and Ramona Salnave, Individually, Appellants,
v.
PUBLIC HEALTH TRUST OF DADE COUNTY, d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital and University of Miami d/b/a University of Miami School of Medicine, Appellees.

No. 92-22.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

August 3, 1993. Rehearing Denied October 12, 1993.

Friedman & Preiser and Lawrence B. Friedman, Miami, for appellants.

Robert A. Ginsburg and Stephen J. Keating, Miami, for appellee Public Health Trust of Dade County.

Fowler, White, Burnett, Hurley, Banick & Strickfoot and Steven E. Stark, Miami, for appellee University of Miami.

Before NESBITT, COPE and GODERICH, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs, the Salnaves, appeal an order denying their motion for a new trial subsequent to a jury verdict in favor of the defendants, University of Miami School of Medicine and Jackson Memorial Hospital. We find that the trial court acted appropriately within its broad discretion in denying the plaintiffs' motion for new trial where the jury's finding with respect to legal cause is not contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence. See Baptist Memorial Hosp., Inc. v. Bell, 384 So.2d 145 (Fla. 1980) (standard for appellate review of denial of motion for new trial is whether trial court abused its discretion); Fernandez v. Berkel, Inc., 506 So.2d 57 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987); Garcia v. Lujando, 253 So.2d 725 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971) (appellate court will not substitute its judgment for that of jury where there is substantial, competent evidence to support finding of fact).

We also find that the unobjected to comments do not rise to the level of fundamental error. Brumage v. Plummer, 502 So.2d 966 (Fla. 3d DCA), rev. denied, 513 So.2d 1062 (Fla. 1987). For these reasons, the judgment entered pursuant to the verdict is hereby,

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

624 So. 2d 282, 1993 WL 287705, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/salnave-v-public-health-trust-fladistctapp-1993.

Opinion

Arnold SALNAVE and Ramona Salnave, his wife, as parents and next friends of Sylvain Salnave, a Minor, and Ramona Salnave, Individually, Appellants, v. PUBLIC HEALTH TRUST OF DADE COUNTY, d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital and University of Miami d/b/a University of Miami School of Medicine, Appellees.

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Arnold SALNAVE and Ramona Salnave, his wife, as parents and next friends of Sylvain Salnave, a Minor, and Ramona Salnave, Individually, Appellants,
v.
PUBLIC HEALTH TRUST OF DADE COUNTY, d/b/a Jackson Memorial Hospital and University of Miami d/b/a University of Miami School of Medicine, Appellees.