AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Attorney(S)
Judges

KMART CORPORATION, APPELLANT, v. MARCIA HERZOG AND MAX HERZOG, APPELLEES.

PER CURIAM.

We cannot say that the order granting a new trial—on the grounds that the verdict was against the manifest weight of the evidence is outside the broad discretion given to trial judges in such matters. See Cloud v. Fallis, 110 So.2d 669 (Fla. 1959); Castlewood International Corp. v. LaFleur, 322 So.2d 520 (Fla. 1975); Baptist Memorial Hospital, Inc. v. Bell, 384 So.2d 145 (Fla. 1980), Ford Motor Co. v. Kikis, 401 So.2d 1341 (Fla. 1981); Smith v. Brown, 525 So.2d 868 (Fla. 1988); Nicaise v. Gagnon, 597 So.2d 305 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992). In affirming the new trial order, however, we do not do so because we agree that a new trial was required as a matter of law.

STONE, C.J., GUNTHER and FARMER, JJ., concur.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

KMART CORPORATION v. HERZOG
(Jul 16, 1997)