Florida District Courts of Appeal, 1976

Vega v. Cosmopolitan Mutual Insurance

Florida District Courts of Appeal · Decided August 17, 1976 · No. 75-1556 · Martin, Nathan, Pearson, Sack

336 So. 2d 660; 1976 Fla. App. LEXIS 15367 (Southern Reporter, Second Series)

Cases that cite this one

1 later published case cites this decision.

Flagship Bank of Orlando v. Bryan (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1980)

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

PER CURIAM.

The appellants, Francisco and Adelida Vega, were the plaintiffs in the trial court. They recovered a verdict in the amount of approximately $400. This appeal is from that judgment.

Errors are assigned upon an evidentiary ruling and claimed prejudicial statements by the attorney for the defendant made at closing argument. The plaintiffs, after re*661ceiving the verdict, did not file a motion for a new trial. We conclude that under these circumstances, thes claimed inadequacy of the verdict was not presented to the trial court.

The judgment must be affirmed upon the authority of the rule stated in Morrison v. Bohne, Fla.App.1973, 274 So.2d 896, and authorities cited therein. See also: O’Leary v. Watson, Fla.App.1972, 263 So.2d 643; Malec v. Halter, Fla.App.1968, 216 So.2d 782; Tampa Transit Lines, Inc. v. Smith, Fla.App.1963, 155 So.2d 557.

Affirmed.

Case-law data current through September 30, 2026. Source: CourtListener bulk data.