Case Name: Harold E. SIMON, Appellant, v. Stanley Jay BARTEL, individually, Bartel & Shuford, P.A., a Florida professional association, and Bartel, Shuford & Dubitsky, P.A., a Florida professional association, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1987-02-24
Citations: 502 So. 2d 1011
Docket Number: No. 86-406
Parties: Harold E. SIMON, Appellant, v. Stanley Jay BARTEL, individually, Bartel & Shuford, P.A., a Florida professional association, and Bartel, Shuford & Dubitsky, P.A., a Florida professional association, Appellees.
Judges: Before NESBITT, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 502
Pages: 1011–1012

Head Matter:
Harold E. SIMON, Appellant, v. Stanley Jay BARTEL, individually, Bartel & Shuford, P.A., a Florida professional association, and Bartel, Shuford & Dubitsky, P.A., a Florida professional association, Appellees.
No. 86-406.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Feb. 24, 1987.
Robert C. Maland, Miami, for appellant.
Joe N. Unger, Miami, for appellees.
Before NESBITT, DANIEL S. PEARSON and JORGENSON, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The trial court's judgment for the defendant notwithstanding the jury's verdict for the plaintiff correctly recognized the fundamental principle that there is no cognizable cause of action for a mere wrong without damage. See McIntyre v. McCloud, 334 So.2d 171 (Fla. 3d DCA 1976).
Affirmed.