Case ID: so2d_596/html/1284-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "FEDER, RICHARD Y., Associate Judge.", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

William J. McLEAN, II, Appellant/Cross-appellee, v. CIRCLE K CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, and Indian Trail Water Control District, Appellees, and Circle K Construction Corporation, a Florida corporation, Cross-appellant.
    Nos. 90-0175, 90-0531.
    District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
    April 29, 1992.
    Wallace B. McCall of McCall & Johnson, Palm Beach, and Philip M. Burlington of Edna L. Caruso, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant/cross-appellee.
    Janis Brustares Keyser of Reid, Ricca & Rigell, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appel-lee/cross-appellant-Circle K Const. Corp.
   FEDER, RICHARD Y., Associate Judge.

The status of appellant and the remaining issues raised were clearly jury issues. See Darley v. Marquee Enterprises, Inc., 565 So.2d 715 (Fla. 4th DCA 1990). There were conflicting facts concerning whether the spoil pile was a public roadway, whether the appellant had an express or implied invitation, etc. The weighing of evidence and the credibility of the givers of evidence is purely for the jury, not this court.

Therefore, both the appeal and cross-appeal from the denials of directed verdicts are denied and the trial court affirmed except as hereinafter stated.

The appellant has quite properly confessed error as to the issue of taxed costs since the supreme court decisions of Aspen v. Bayless, 564 So.2d 1081 (Fla.1990), and Drew v. Couch, 565 So.2d 1354 (Fla.1990), were not available to either counsel or the trial court at the time of the hearing. The matter is remanded to the trial court for the sole purpose of determining the appropriate taxable costs.

WARNER and POLEN, JJ., concur.