Case ID: so2d_252/html/0863-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "PER CURIAM.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Evelyn HERSCHER and Bernard Herscher, her husband, Appellants, v. ALBERT ENTERPRISES, INC., etc., et al., Appellees.
    No. 71-115.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    Oct. 5, 1971.
    Kates, Ress, Gomez & Rosenberg, North Miami, for appellants.
    West & Goldman, Fuller, Brumer, Moss & Cohen, Miami, Joe N. Unger, Miami Beach, for appellees.
    Before SWANN, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The plaintiffs appeal a final judgment entered upon a jury verdict. The points relied upon for reversal all argue claimed procedural errors in the trial of the case or in the court’s handling of the post-trial motions. We hold that prejudicial error does not appear in the record. It has been frequently held that an appellate court will not reverse for a new trial upon procedural errors where it affirmatively appears that the claimed errors did not affect appellant’s right to a fair trial. Hill v. Sadler, Fla.App.1966, 186 So.2d 52.

Affirmed.