Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1968

Winnemore v. Morton

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided October 9, 1968 · Cross, Owen, Walden

214 So. 2d 509 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

5 later published cases cite this decision.

JTA Factors, Inc. v. PHILCON SERV., INC. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)
Centro Nautico v. INTERN. MARINE CO-OP (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)
Nordyne v. Florida Mobile Home Supply (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)
Lembo v. Broward County School Board (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)
Thomas v. Lumbermens Mut. Cas. Co. (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1982)

This list shows which later cases cite this one. It does not say how they treated it, and no review of that has been done. Not a substitute for Shepard’s or KeyCite — verify before relying.

Opinion of the Court

OWEN, Judge.

Appellant, defendant below, suffered an adverse jury verdict in a suit on a promissory note, and raises on this appeal the question of the weight and sufficiency of the evidence to support the verdict for the plaintiff. Defendant did not move for a directed verdict at any time during the trial nor did he file a motion for a new trial. Defendant must make either a timely motion for directed verdict, 6551 Collins Avenue Corp. v. Millen, Fla.1958, 104 So. 2d 337, or a motion for a new trial on the ground that the verdict of the jury is contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence, Ruth v. Sorensen, Fla.1958, 104 So.2d 10, and properly assign as error the denial of such motion, if he wishes to preserve the right to appellate review of the weight and sufficiency of the evidence. Having made neither a timely motion for directed verdict nor a motion for new trial, defendant cannot question the legal sufficiency of the evidence on appeal. City of Pompano Beach, Florida v. Edwards, Fla.App.1961, 129 So.2d 144.

The judgment is affirmed.

WALDEN, C. J., and CROSS, J., concur.

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.