Southeastern Fire Insurance Co. v. McPherson

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Southeastern Fire Insurance Co. v. McPherson

497 So. 2d 664, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2134, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10028

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 8, 1986

DocketNo. 85-1488

StatusPublished

This text of 497 So. 2d 664 (Southeastern Fire Insurance Co. v. McPherson) 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

Southeastern Fire Insurance Co. v. McPherson, 497 So. 2d 664, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2134, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10028 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

Opinions

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final judgment, following entry of a directed verdict on the issue of liability in favor of the plaintiffs against the defendants. We reverse and remand for new trial, concluding that it was error so to direct the verdict. As the matter must be retried based on the pleadings, including the theory — of persons acting in concert — propounded by the memorandum of law delivered by the plaintiffs on the first day of trial, we shall mention those matters which are likely to arise again. In our view it was error to grant the motion in limine, excluding from the jury’s consideration the circumstances of what occurred initially; and it would be further error, on retrial, to exclude evidence of the individual defendant’s intent throughout the entire episode. We find no other harmful error in the further points raised by appellants.

GLICKSTEIN, J., and WETHERING-TON, GERALD T., Associate Judge, concur. DOWNEY, J., dissents with opinion.

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

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a final judgment, following entry of a directed verdict on the issue of liability in favor of the plaintiffs against the defendants. We reverse and remand for new trial, concluding that it was error so to direct the verdict. As the matter must be retried based on the pleadings, including the theory — of persons acting in concert — propounded by the memorandum of law delivered by the plaintiffs on the first day of trial, we shall mention those matters which are likely to arise again. In our view it was error to grant the motion in limine, excluding from the jury’s consideration the circumstances of what occurred initially; and it would be further error, on retrial, to exclude evidence of the individual defendant’s intent throughout the entire episode. We find no other harmful error in the further points raised by appellants.

GLICKSTEIN, J., and WETHERING-TON, GERALD T., Associate Judge, concur. DOWNEY, J., dissents with opinion.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

497 So. 2d 664, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2134, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10028, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/southeastern-fire-insurance-co-v-mcpherson-fladistctapp-1986.