Case ID: so2d_674/html/0934-03.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

JOSEPH LAND & COMPANY, INC., Charles Earl Mitchell and Transport Insurance Company, Appellants, v. Rayza GONZALEZ, Appellee.
    Nos. 95-1635, 95-2346.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
    June 12, 1996.
    
      Roth, Edwards & Smith and James A. Edwards, Orlando, for appellants.
    Smith Demahy Drake Cozad & Cabeza and Kenneth R. Drake, Miami, for appellee.
    Before JORGENSON, GODERICH and GREEN, JJ.
   PER CURIAM.

The defendants, Joseph Land & Company, Inc., Charles Earl Mitchell, and Transport Insurance Company, appeal from an adverse final judgment, from the denial of their motion for a new trial or a remittitur, and from an adverse final cost judgment. We affirm finding that the trial court did not abuse its discretion by denying the defendants’ motion for a new trial or a remittitur where the jury’s verdict was not against the manifest weight of the evidence. Lassiter v. International Union Of Operating Eng’rs, 349 So.2d 622, 627 (Fla.1976); Taylor v. Ganas, 443 So.2d 251, 253 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

The defendants’ remaining points lack merit.

Accordingly, we affirm.