Case Name: Fulgencio PADILLA, Sr., Appellant, v. Donald BUELL, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 2001-09-26
Citations: 797 So. 2d 609
Docket Number: No. 3D00-3226
Parties: Fulgencio PADILLA, Sr., Appellant, v. Donald BUELL, Appellee.
Judges: Before LEVY, GREEN, and FLETCHER, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 797
Pages: 609–609

Head Matter:
Fulgencio PADILLA, Sr., Appellant, v. Donald BUELL, Appellee.
No. 3D00-3226.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Sept. 26, 2001.
Paul J. Kneski, Miami, for appellant.
Burd, Lozano & Zacherl, LLP, and William G. Burd, and John S. McPhee, Miami, for appellee.
Before LEVY, GREEN, and FLETCHER, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final judgment following a defense verdict in a property negligence action. The plaintiff abandoned his motion for new trial without having it heard, and thus seeks to overturn the jury's verdict.
We find that the failure of plaintiffs counsel to object with specificity to defense counsel's remarks during closing argument waived any error that might have occurred. See Sawczak v. Goldenberg, 710 So.2d 996, 997 (Fla. 4th DCA 1998). Moreover, the implied reference to insurance matters in this case was not fundamental error requiring reversal. See Melara v. Cicione, 712 So.2d 429, 431 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998).
We also find no abuse of discretion in the trial court's evidentiary rulings. Therefore, we affirm.