Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
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

OMER CORPORATION, DOING BUSINESS AS REMO'S RESTAURANT, APPELLANT, v. GEORGE DUKE, APPELLEE.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant, which was the defendant in the trial court, appeals a final judgment and assigns as error the trial court's denial of its motion for a new trial. It affirmatively appears from the record that a procedural irregularity, which was the basis of the motion for a new trial, occurred during the final argument of appellant's counsel before the jury retired. Appellant's counsel learned of it before the jury returned to deliver its verdict, but he did not complain until the adverse verdict had been announced. Under these circumstances we hold that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for a new trial. See Tyus v. Apalachicola Northern Railroad Company, Fla. 1961, 130 So.2d 580, 587, 588.

Affirmed.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

OMER CORPORATION v. DUKE
(May 28, 1968)