From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Bowman v. Bill Lomax Paint Body

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 18, 1969
225 So. 2d 438 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)

Opinion

No. 68-948.

July 22, 1969. Rehearing Denied August 18, 1969.

Appeal from the Civil Court of Record for Dade County, John Red Lake, J.

Hawkesworth Kay and Charles H. Baumberger, Miami, for appellant.

Conway E. Boone, Jr., Hialeah, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C.J., and BARKDULL and SWANN, JJ.


The plaintiff below appeals from a final judgment based upon a jury verdict in an action for damages for breach of contract. The basis of the appeal is that the trial court should have granted a new trial because of improper argument to the jury by defendant-appellee's attorney.

An examination of the record reveals that the comments complained of occurred in the attorney's opening statement to the jury. We hold that the trial court correctly ruled that the comments were not of such a nature as to require a new trial. Therefore the judgment is affirmed upon authority of the rule stated in Pix Shoes of Miami, Inc. v. Howarth, Fla.App. 1967, 201 So.2d 80; Bieley v. Jennings Construction Corporation, Fla.App. 1968, 212 So.2d 809.

Affirmed.


Summaries of

Bowman v. Bill Lomax Paint Body

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District
Aug 18, 1969
225 So. 2d 438 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)
Case details for

Bowman v. Bill Lomax Paint Body

Case Details

Full title:CLAUDE W. BOWMAN, APPELLANT, v. BILL LOMAX PAINT AND BODY SHOP, INC.…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District

Date published: Aug 18, 1969

Citations

225 So. 2d 438 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)