Willis v. Ryals

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Willis v. Ryals

328 So. 2d 475, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14854

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 10, 1976·No. No. Z-38·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

FULLER, RICHARD S., Associate Judge.

The pre-trial order specified the issues to be submitted to the trier of fact. The [476]*476jury, by its verdict, determined that the boundary between appellants’ and appellees’ property was the old fence line and, in addition, awarded appellees $25.00 damages as a result of appellants’ interference therewith.

There is no basis for upsetting the jury’s findings.

The parties admit that an error exists in the property description contained in the Final Judgment. Accordingly, the cause is remanded to the trial court solely for the purpose of correcting this error in the Final Judgment. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(a).

McCORD, Acting C. J., and SMITH, J., concur.

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

FULLER, RICHARD S., Associate Judge.

The pre-trial order specified the issues to be submitted to the trier of fact. The [476]*476jury, by its verdict, determined that the boundary between appellants’ and appellees’ property was the old fence line and, in addition, awarded appellees $25.00 damages as a result of appellants’ interference therewith.

There is no basis for upsetting the jury’s findings.

The parties admit that an error exists in the property description contained in the Final Judgment. Accordingly, the cause is remanded to the trial court solely for the purpose of correcting this error in the Final Judgment. Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.540(a).

McCORD, Acting C. J., and SMITH, J., concur.

Willis v. Ryals, 328 So. 2d 475, 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 14854 (Fla. Ct. App. 1976).

Pincite

328 So. 2d 475 (Willis v. Ryals) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related