Yanherwaarden v. Karten

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Yanherwaarden v. Karten

466 So. 2d 446, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 913, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13402

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedApril 10, 1985

DocketNo. 84-1974

StatusPublished

This text of 466 So. 2d 446 (Yanherwaarden v. Karten) 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

Yanherwaarden v. Karten, 466 So. 2d 446, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 913, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13402 (Fla. Ct. App. 1985).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s entry of judgment pursuant to a jury verdict and denial of appellant’s motion for new trial. The appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error in the trial court’s denial of all four challenges for cause made during the jury selection process. See, e.g., Stokes v. State, 54 Fla. 109, 44 So. 759 (1907).

ANSTEAD, C.J., WALDEN, J., and CARLISLE, JAMES T., Associate Judge, concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the trial court’s entry of judgment pursuant to a jury verdict and denial of appellant’s motion for new trial. The appellant has failed to demonstrate reversible error in the trial court’s denial of all four challenges for cause made during the jury selection process. See, e.g., Stokes v. State, 54 Fla. 109, 44 So. 759 (1907).

ANSTEAD, C.J., WALDEN, J., and CARLISLE, JAMES T., Associate Judge, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

466 So. 2d 446, 10 Fla. L. Weekly 913, 1985 Fla. App. LEXIS 13402, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/yanherwaarden-v-karten-fladistctapp-1985.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack