From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Herbello v. Perez

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 5, 2000
754 So. 2d 840 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Summary

finding that erroneous evidentiary rulings did not affect outcome of trial; therefore, errors were harmless

Summary of this case from Vickers v. Thomas

Opinion

No. 3D99-666.

Opinion filed April 5, 2000.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, Amy Steele Donner, Judge. LOWER TRIBUNAL NO. 96-19784

Oscar Syger, for appellant.

Richard A. Sherman and Rosemary B. Wilder; Timothy Harrington and Stephen K. Katz, for appellee.

Before JORGENSON, GODERICH, and RAMIREZ, JJ.


After carefully reviewing the record, we find that the alleged erroneous evidentiary ruling did not affect the outcome of the trial. Therefore, the error, if any, was harmless. § 59.041, Fla. Stat. (1999); Katos v. Cushing, 601 So.2d 612, 613 (Fla.3d DCA 1992) (holding that in a civil case the "test for harmful error is whether, but for such error, a different result may have been reached.").

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Herbello v. Perez

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Apr 5, 2000
754 So. 2d 840 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

finding that erroneous evidentiary rulings did not affect outcome of trial; therefore, errors were harmless

Summary of this case from Vickers v. Thomas
Case details for

Herbello v. Perez

Case Details

Full title:JORGE LUIS HERBELLO, Appellant, vs. HUMBERTO PEREZ, Appellee

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Apr 5, 2000

Citations

754 So. 2d 840 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

Citing Cases

Vickers v. Thomas

Thomas had previously been involved in an automobile accident after which she sought treatment for neck and…

Tracey v. Wells Fargo Bank

Pragmatically speaking, the test she proposes would likely prove to be illusory in application. If the…