Case Name: Sandra Joan SCHALLER, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. KMART CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, Appellee/Cross-Appellant
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1994-02-15
Citations: 631 So. 2d 380
Docket Number: No. 92-1266
Parties: Sandra Joan SCHALLER, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. KMART CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
Judges: Before COPE, GERSTEN and GODERICH, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 631
Pages: 380–380

Head Matter:
Sandra Joan SCHALLER, Appellant/Cross-Appellee, v. KMART CORPORATION, a foreign corporation, Appellee/Cross-Appellant.
No. 92-1266.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 15, 1994.
Parenti, Falk, Waas & Frazier and Leslie F. Hecker and Gail Leverett, Miami, for appellant.
Peters, Robertson, Lax, Parsons & Welch-er and Neil P. Robertson and Yvette Rhodes Prescott, Miami, for appellee.
Before COPE, GERSTEN and GODERICH, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Sandra Joan Schaller, plaintiff below, appeals the denial of her motion for new trial, asserting that the damages awarded to her were inadequate. A motion for new trial is addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge. White v. Martinez, 359 So.2d 7, 8 (Fla. 3d DCA 1978). After careful consideration of plaintiffs arguments, we conclude that there was no abuse of discretion in the trial court's denial of the new trial motion. See Griffis v. Hill, 230 So.2d 143, 145 (Fla.1969). This ruling moots the cross-appeal.
Affirmed.