Case ID: so2d_231/html/0547-03.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

Charles SEELY. Appellant, v. The HERTZ CORPORATION, a Delaware corporation, and William Taylor, Appellees.
    No. 69-293.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.
    Feb. 20, 1970.
    Council Wooten, Jr., of Billings & Frederick, Orlando, for appellant.
    
      R. G. Ross, of Pitts, Eubanks & Ross, Orlando, for appellees.
   PER CURIAM.

We have examined the record and the appellate presentation and find that the presumption of correctness which accompanies orders allowing a new trial has not been overcome. No abuse of discretion having been demonstrated, the order granting a new trial is hereby affirmed. Cloud v. Fallis, Fla. 1959, 110 So.2d 669; City of Fort Pierce v. Cooper, Fla.App.1966, 190 So.2d 12; and Volk v. Goetz, Fla.App. 1967, 206 So.2d 250; 2 Fla.Jur., Appeals, § 317.

Affirmed.

WALDEN, REED, and OWEN, JJ., concur.