Legal Opinion

Hollub v. Clancy

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided January 4, 1995No. Nos. 94-788, 94-1985PublishedCited by 2 opinions

1Per curiam

The defendants, Marvin A. Hollub, et al., appeal from an adverse final judgment and from the denial of their post-trial motions for new trial and for remittitur. The plaintiffs, Peter J; Clancy, et al., cross-appeal from the final judgment. We affirm all aspects of the final judgment and the denial of the defendants’ post-trial motions.

We find that there was competent, substantial evidence to support the jury’s verdict. Randy Int’l, Ltd. v. American Excess Corp., 501 So.2d 667, 670 (Fla. 3d DCA 1987). Moreover, we find that the trial court properly denied the defendants’ motions for a new…

2Cases cited3 opinions

  1. Lasar Mfg. Co., Inc. v. BachanovDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1983
  2. Randy Intern., Ltd. v. American Excess Corp.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1987
  3. Dixie Farms, Inc. v. TimmonsDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1975

3Cited by2 opinions

  1. Hollub v. ClancyDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1997
  2. Travelers Indemnity Co. v. Florida Rock & Sand Co.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1996

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API