From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

U.S. Fidelity Guar. Co. v. Perez

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 14, 1993
622 So. 2d 486 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Opinion

No. 92-2767.

July 6, 1993. Rehearing Denied September 14, 1993.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Dade County, James C. Henderson, Judge.

Richard A. Sherman and Rosemary B. Wilder, Mark Pedisich and William C. Riethmiller, Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Joe N. Unger, Aronovitz Associates, Miami, for appellee.

Before BASKIN, JORGENSON and LEVY, JJ.


We reverse the order denying defendant's motion for new trial following a jury verdict in plaintiff's favor. The jury was entitled to render a finding contrary to the uncontradicted expert testimony regarding the permanency of plaintiff's injury. Easkold v. Rhodes, 614 So.2d 495 (Fla. 1993); State Farm Mutual Auto. Ins. Co. v. Garcia, 621 So.2d 475 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). The trial court erred when it failed to submit the issue to the jury. The motion for new trial should have been granted.

Reversed and remanded.


Summaries of

U.S. Fidelity Guar. Co. v. Perez

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Sep 14, 1993
622 So. 2d 486 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Case details for

U.S. Fidelity Guar. Co. v. Perez

Case Details

Full title:UNITED STATES FIDELITY GUARANTY COMPANY, APPELLANT, v. MARITZA PEREZ…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Sep 14, 1993

Citations

622 So. 2d 486 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

Citing Cases

Repub. Svcs. of Florida v. Poucher

A jury is free to reject even uncontradicted expert witness testimony. Id. at 497;Shaw v. Puleo, 159 So.2d…

Katz v. Ghodsi

As we explained in Shaw [ v. Puleo, 159 So.2d 641 (Fla. 1964)], "even though the facts testified to by [the…