From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wagner v. Thigpen

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Oct 6, 1966
190 So. 2d 612 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)

Opinion

No. H-351.

October 6, 1966.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Leon County, Ben C. Willis, J.

Carl R. Pennington, Jr., and F. Perry Odom, of Ervin, Pennington, Varn Jacobs, Tallahassee, for appellants.

Hall, Hartwell, Hall Canada, Tallahassee, for appellees.


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.


Summaries of

Wagner v. Thigpen

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District
Oct 6, 1966
190 So. 2d 612 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)
Case details for

Wagner v. Thigpen

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD JOSEPH WAGNER, JR. AND JOAN S. WAGNER, APPELLANTS, v. LEE THIGPEN…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District

Date published: Oct 6, 1966

Citations

190 So. 2d 612 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1966)