Sharp Electronics Corp. v. Romeka

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Sharp Electronics Corp. v. Romeka

513 So. 2d 721, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2294, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12191

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedSeptember 23, 1987

DocketNo. BM-12

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 513 So. 2d 721 (Sharp Electronics Corp. v. Romeka) 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

Sharp Electronics Corp. v. Romeka, 513 So. 2d 721, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2294, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12191 (Fla. Ct. App. 1987).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

Sharp Electronics Corporation appeals a judgment awarding damages for injuries suffered by William Romeka caused by defects in a microwave oven manufactured by Sharp. Sharp raises eight points on appeal.

Points one through seven attack discretionary rulings on the admissibility of testimony. We have carefully reviewed the record and conclude that appellant has failed to demonstrate that these rulings constituted an abuse of discretion resulting in harmful error.

The eighth point complains that during final argument counsel for appellees made a number of highly improper and inflammatory statements which were so prejudicial to Sharp that a new trial must be ordered. We agree that some of the statements were improper and should not be condoned, and caution trial counsel to be more attentive to the scope of permissible argument. Likewise, it appears that the trial judge could have been more direct and definitive in his rulings on some of appellant’s objections to the argument. After carefully reviewing the final arguments in their entirety in context with the trial record as a whole, however, we are unable to conclude that counsel’s improper statements so affected the trial and the jury’s verdict as to amount to harmful error and require the case to be tried again.

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON and ZEHMER, JJ., concur. BARFIELD, J., dissents with written opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

Sharp Electronics Corporation appeals a judgment awarding damages for injuries suffered by William Romeka caused by defects in a microwave oven manufactured by Sharp. Sharp raises eight points on appeal.

Points one through seven attack discretionary rulings on the admissibility of testimony. We have carefully reviewed the record and conclude that appellant has failed to demonstrate that these rulings constituted an abuse of discretion resulting in harmful error.

The eighth point complains that during final argument counsel for appellees made a number of highly improper and inflammatory statements which were so prejudicial to Sharp that a new trial must be ordered. We agree that some of the statements were improper and should not be condoned, and caution trial counsel to be more attentive to the scope of permissible argument. Likewise, it appears that the trial judge could have been more direct and definitive in his rulings on some of appellant’s objections to the argument. After carefully reviewing the final arguments in their entirety in context with the trial record as a whole, however, we are unable to conclude that counsel’s improper statements so affected the trial and the jury’s verdict as to amount to harmful error and require the case to be tried again.

AFFIRMED.

THOMPSON and ZEHMER, JJ., concur. BARFIELD, J., dissents with written opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

513 So. 2d 721, 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2294, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 12191, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sharp-electronics-corp-v-romeka-fladistctapp-1987.

Opinions

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack