Ludlum v. Rothman
District Court of Appeal of Florida
1Per curiam
This was a suit for personal injuries resulting from a three vehicular collision. The evidence was in conflict as to the sequence of events, the manner in which the collision(s) occurred, and fault generally. The accident occurred in 1981 and there were inconsistencies ip the testimony of key witnesses during the six day trial that took place in 1985.
The jury returned a verdict in favor of the defendants. The trial court granted a new trial saying the verdict was contrary to the manifest weight of the evidence because:
a. There were sharp inconsistencies in the defendants’ various statements.
b.…
2Cases cited3 opinions
- Wackenhut Corp. v. CantySupreme Court of Florida · 1978
- Perenic v. CastelliDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1977
- Kashino v. MorellDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1984
3Cited by3 opinions
- Tuttle v. Miami Dolphins, Ltd.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1989
- Demont v. DemontDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2011
- Uniroyal Tire Co. v. TrujilloDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998