Case Name: Miriam CARAMES and Eduardo Carames, her husband, Appellants, v. Edward GOLDEN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Armando P. Bujosa and Bankers Insurance Company, a Florida corporation, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1984-03-06
Citations: 445 So. 2d 1140
Docket Number: No. 83-1259
Parties: Miriam CARAMES and Eduardo Carames, her husband, Appellants, v. Edward GOLDEN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Armando P. Bujosa and Bankers Insurance Company, a Florida corporation, Appellees.
Judges: Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 445
Pages: 1140–1140

Head Matter:
Miriam CARAMES and Eduardo Carames, her husband, Appellants, v. Edward GOLDEN, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Armando P. Bujosa and Bankers Insurance Company, a Florida corporation, Appellees.
No. 83-1259.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
March 6, 1984.
Friedman & Lipcon and Gary Friedman, for appellants.
Richard M. Gale; Weinstein & Bavly, Miami, for appellees.
Before BARKDULL, HUBBART and JORGENSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Although we agree that a trial court has broad discretion to control the manner in which peremptory challenges are to be exercised, see Eastern Air Lines, Inc. v. Gellert, 438 So.2d 923 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), and the cases cited therein, the trial court's refusal to permit the plaintiff an opportunity to exercise his last remaining peremptory challenge prior to the jury's being sworn is reversible error, see O'Connor v. State, 9 Fla. 215 (1860); Saborit v. Deliford, 312 So.2d 795 (Fla. 3d DCA), cert. denied, 327 So.2d 32 (Fla.1976). Accordingly, the final judgment under review is reversed and the action is remanded for a new trial.
Reversed and remanded.