Case Name: Edward Joseph WAGNER, Jr. and Joan S. Wagner, Appellants, v. Lee THIGPEN and Dorsil Ray Reaves, a minor, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1966-10-06
Citations: 190 So. 2d 612
Docket Number: No. H-351
Parties: Edward Joseph WAGNER, Jr. and Joan S. Wagner, Appellants, v. Lee THIGPEN and Dorsil Ray Reaves, a minor, Appellees.
Judges: WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., JOHNSON and SACK, JJ., concur.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 190
Pages: 612–612

Head Matter:
Edward Joseph WAGNER, Jr. and Joan S. Wagner, Appellants, v. Lee THIGPEN and Dorsil Ray Reaves, a minor, Appellees.
No. H-351.
District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.
Oct. 6, 1966.
Carl R. Pennington, Jr., and F. Perry Odom, of Ervin, Pennington, Varn & Jacobs, Tallahassee, for appellants.
Hall, Plartwell, Hall & Canada, Tallahassee, for appellees.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, who were the losing plaintiffs in an automobile negligence case, complain of the lower court's action in denying their motion for a new trial based upon newly discovered evidence, to wit, the testimony of an eyewitness who could not have been found with due diligence up to the time of trial.
We do not believe that the testimony of this witness necessarily demonstrates that the defendants' witnesses gave false testimony, and appellants have failed clearly to show that the trial court abused its discretion in finding that the proffered evidence was not such as would probably change the result reached by the jury in the original trial if a new trial were to be granted.
Accordingly, the judgment below is affirmed.
WIGGINTON, Acting C. J., JOHNSON and SACK, JJ., concur.