Schaad v. Frisk Corp., N.V.
605 So. 2d 1027, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11066, 1992 WL 296040
Opinion
There was competent substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict. Therefore, we reverse the trial court’s order granting the defendant’s motion for judgment non obstante veredicto and reinstate the jury’s verdict in favor of the plaintiff. See Stirling v. Sapp, 229 So.2d 850 (Fla.1969); United Farm Agency of Fla., Inc. v. DKLS, Inc., 560 So.2d 1212 (Fla.3d DCA 1990).
Reversed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Schaad v. Frisk Corp., N.V., 605 So. 2d 1027, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 11066, 1992 WL 296040 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).
605 So. 2d 1027 (Schaad v. Frisk Corp., N.V.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Stirling v. Sapp
229 So. 2d 850 (Supreme Court of Florida, 1969)
United Farm Agency of Fla., Inc. v. DKLS, INC.
560 So. 2d 1212 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1990)