State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Ortega

District Court of Appeal of Florida

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Ortega

644 So. 2d 550, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9494, 1994 WL 535077

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedOctober 5, 1994

DocketNo. 94-437

StatusPublished

Cited by1 cases

This text of 644 So. 2d 550 (State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Ortega) 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

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. v. Ortega, 644 So. 2d 550, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9494, 1994 WL 535077 (Fla. Ct. App. 1994).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. appeals an order granting the motion of plaintiffs-appellees Carmen C. Ortega and Pablo Ortega for a new trial on damages. We find no error in the trial court’s determination that a new trial on damages is required. However, State Farm correctly asserts that the trial court erred in excluding State Farm’s only expert witness, Dr. Richard Glatzer, for failure to produce certain financial information. We reverse that ruling on authority of Syken v. Elkins, 644 So.2d 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (en banc). There must be a new trial on liability as well as damages.

Affirmed as modified.

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

PER CURIAM.

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Co. appeals an order granting the motion of plaintiffs-appellees Carmen C. Ortega and Pablo Ortega for a new trial on damages. We find no error in the trial court’s determination that a new trial on damages is required. However, State Farm correctly asserts that the trial court erred in excluding State Farm’s only expert witness, Dr. Richard Glatzer, for failure to produce certain financial information. We reverse that ruling on authority of Syken v. Elkins, 644 So.2d 539 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994) (en banc). There must be a new trial on liability as well as damages.

Affirmed as modified.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

644 So. 2d 550, 1994 Fla. App. LEXIS 9494, 1994 WL 535077, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/state-farm-mutual-automobile-insurance-co-v-ortega-fladistctapp-1994.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack