Case Name: JOSEPH LAND & COMPANY, INC., Charles Earl Mitchell and Transport Insurance Company, Appellants, v. Rayza GONZALEZ, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1996-06-12
Citations: 674 So. 2d 934
Docket Number: Nos. 95-1635, 95-2346
Parties: JOSEPH LAND & COMPANY, INC., Charles Earl Mitchell and Transport Insurance Company, Appellants, v. Rayza GONZALEZ, Appellee.
Judges: Before JORGENSON, GODERICH and GREEN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 674
Pages: 934–935

Head Matter:
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.

Opinion:
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.