Case Name: Paul J. NASRALLAH, individually and as father, next friend and natural guardian of Victoria Ann Nasrallah and Michael Nasrallah, minors, Appellants, v. John CORLEY and Walteen G. Corley, Appellees
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1965-11-30
Citations: 180 So. 2d 476
Docket Number: No. 65-289
Parties: Paul J. NASRALLAH, individually and as father, next friend and natural guardian of Victoria Ann Nasrallah and Michael Nasrallah, minors, Appellants, v. John CORLEY and Walteen G. Corley, Appellees.
Judges: Before HENDRY, C. J., and TILLMAN PEARSON and SWANN, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 180
Pages: 476–477

Head Matter:
Paul J. NASRALLAH, individually and as father, next friend and natural guardian of Victoria Ann Nasrallah and Michael Nasrallah, minors, Appellants, v. John CORLEY and Walteen G. Corley, Appellees.
No. 65-289.
District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.
Nov. 30, 1965.
Thomas J. Gaine and Louis M. Jepeway, Miami, for appellants.
Knight, Underwood, Peters & Hoeveler and Cecyl L. Pickle, Miami, for appellees.
Before HENDRY, C. J., and TILLMAN PEARSON and SWANN, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The above styled appeal from the circuit court of Dade County is by the plaintiff in that court. The order, judgment or decree of which review is sought is a final judgment at law for the plaintiffs, appellants. This final judgment was entered pursuant to a jury verdict awarding the plaintiffs damages. The plaintiffs, appellants, have presented three points, all alleging procedural errors in the cause.
None of the points raised question the court's ruling upon a motion for a new trial directed to the sufficiency of the verdict. Inasmuch as a plaintiff's appeal from a judgment at law based on a jury verdict in plaintiff's favor must be based upon the denial of a motion for new trial raising the question of the adequacy of the damage, these points may not be considered. Paul v. Kanter, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 402, 403.
Appellant has in fact assigned as error the denial of his motion for new. trial but said assignment is not argued and is therefore abandoned. Pentecost v. City of Miami, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 395.
Appellants' remaining point is directed to the assessment of costs and no substantial question is raised in argument under said point.
Therefore this appeal be and the same is hereby quashed.