Case Name: A. S. GRAD et al., Appellants, v. Paul R. COPELAND, Jr., Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1973-06-22
Citations: 280 So. 2d 461
Docket Number: No. 71-319
Parties: A. S. GRAD et al., Appellants, v. Paul R. COPELAND, Jr., Appellee.
Judges: CROSS and OWEN, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 280
Pages: 461–469

Head Matter:
A. S. GRAD et al., Appellants, v. Paul R. COPELAND, Jr., Appellee.
No. 71-319.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.
June 22, 1973.
Rehearing Denied July 30, 1973.
Thomas A. Hoadley of Howell, Kirby, Montgomery, D’Auito, Dean & Hallowes, West Palm Beach, for appellants.
Harry Lee Anstead, of Simpson & An-stead, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Upon careful consideration of the record, briefs and oral argument of counsel, we find that appellants have failed to demonstrate reversible error and the judgment appealed is therefore affirmed.
We have given particular attention to appellants' point concerning the correctness of certain jury instructions. There were multiple issues, involving different standards of proof, i. e., the libel action brought by plaintiff as a public official required clear and convincing evidence, whereas the issues of agency, malicious prosecution and damages required only proof by the greater weight of the evidence. The trial court carefully delineated these several issues and the proper standard of proof as to each and we are of the view that the court's instruction to the jury taken in its totality and in context with the particular issue then being addressed was a clear, concise and correct statement of the applicable law, and could not have been misleading to the jury.
The judgment is affirmed.
CROSS and OWEN, JJ., concur.
SALFI, D. J., Associate Judge, dissents with opinion.